|
Title: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Shockeye on June 14, 2005, 11:31:09 AM Quote from: Seattle Post-Intelligencer People in the News: Disney Minnie-mizes Lohan's breasts (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/people/228282_people14.html) Herbie may be fully loaded, but Lindsay Lohan's only partly there. Test screenings among parent groups found the teenage actress too voluptuous to star in a kids movie. The Irish Examiner was among the first to report that Disney technicians responded by digitally reducing the star's breasts and creating more modest T-shirt necklines to cover the little they had left. "Herbie: Fully Loaded" is the fourth sequel to "The Love Bug" from 1968, about a Volkswagen Beetle with a mind of its own. To please test-market parents, Disney reduced Lohan's breasts by two cup sizes. Since making the movie, Lohan has done some overall size reduction on her own. She's now thin enough to raise the issue of an eating disorder. Lohan is not only unfazed by the digital remake on her body, she seems to welcome it. "Bring on the computer guys," she said, pointing out that such technology could save actors a lot of extra work in the future. "I don't know how Renée Zellweger kept swelling and shrinking for Bridget Jones. It's no fun." Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: schild on June 14, 2005, 11:36:38 AM The mention of the word Lohan brings that godawful picture of her in the red dress into my head.
She's like Bloody fucking Mary. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: WayAbvPar on June 14, 2005, 11:37:19 AM I heard about this. I wonder if her new heroin-chic look is family friendly enough. They can take out the track marks and sallow skin color in post production I guess.
Seriously- this is so fucking stupid. As stupid as Jessica Simpson being shunned by the gospel music industry because her tits were too big. OMG big tits might make people think of sex, and sex is WRONG!!!! I am so fucking sick of the Puritanical crap in this country. It is fine to show murder and rape and car wrecks and drug use and beatings and dismemberments, but if someone says fuck or a nipple is shown, send in the Marines!!!!! A child is at STEAK!11! Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Mesozoic on June 14, 2005, 11:38:56 AM It is fine to show murder and rape and car wrecks and drug use and beatings and dismemberments, but if someone says fuck or a nipple is shown, send in the Marines!!!!! A child is at STEAK!11! Which Disney kids film is this? Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: WayAbvPar on June 14, 2005, 11:39:47 AM Turn on the TV. It is on nearly every channel.
Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: schild on June 14, 2005, 11:40:28 AM The most offensive piece of shit I've seen in years is Hell's Kitchen.
That host needs to be executed in town square. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: voodoolily on June 14, 2005, 11:40:34 AM Heh. It's true, I got to see Temple of DOom, Night of the Living Dead, the Exorcist and Full MEtal Jacket when I as a kid, but if there was ever a nekkid breast my eyes got covered.
Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Shockeye on June 14, 2005, 11:42:54 AM Heh. It's true, I got to see Temple of DOom, Night of the Living Dead, the Exorcist and Full MEtal Jacket when I as a kid, but if there was ever a nekkid breast my eyes got covered. Same here and now I can't get enough naked boobies. Parents, let your children see boobies or else they may turn into pr0ncows. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Paelos on June 14, 2005, 11:45:19 AM I heard about this. I wonder if her new heroin-chic look is family friendly enough. They can take out the track marks and sallow skin color in post production I guess. Seriously- this is so fucking stupid. As stupid as Jessica Simpson being shunned by the gospel music industry because her tits were too big. OMG big tits might make people think of sex, and sex is WRONG!!!! I am so fucking sick of the Puritanical crap in this country. It is fine to show murder and rape and car wrecks and drug use and beatings and dismemberments, but if someone says fuck or a nipple is shown, send in the Marines!!!!! A child is at STEAK!11! Quiet you, it's only a matter of time until I get control and slap crosses on all our marines. They will be God's Army and liberate America from these liberal ideas that are causing moral decay! Yeah, well, it was going into Politics soon anyway, so Godspeed! Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: schild on June 14, 2005, 11:50:30 AM Going from the picture of a not-so-wilting Courtney Cox, to this thread, and back to Courtney Cox - ALMOST makes all the bad stuff go away.
Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: WayAbvPar on June 14, 2005, 11:51:09 AM This is a serious question. Why is someone's natural physical attributes cause for alarm from parents? It is not like she was on spinning around on a Lazy Susan, sucking off all comers. She was running around CLOTHED. You can go to the mall and see the same thing. Why is that considered less appropriate than violence? Or inappropriate for kids at all?
Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: AlteredOne on June 14, 2005, 11:59:38 AM The most offensive piece of shit I've seen in years is Hell's Kitchen. That host needs to be executed in town square. My wife and I caught some of this, and mainly we were amazed at the so-called "diners" lined up to eat in this fake "restaurant." The show asks you to believe that these people are real paying customers. But who would pay money to wait 4 hours for food cooked by a bunch of amateurs, and get cussed out by an insane Brit for complaining? I conclude that the "customers" are actors, and the show is a mean-spirited sham. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Paelos on June 14, 2005, 12:00:39 PM This is a serious question. Why is someone's natural physical attributes cause for alarm from parents? It is not like she was on spinning around on a Lazy Susan, sucking off all comers. She was running around CLOTHED. You can go to the mall and see the same thing. Why is that considered less appropriate than violence? Or inappropriate for kids at all? Because after being a baby you are supposed to forget you ever saw a nipple until you are 35. I just thought of the ultimate punishment for yall. Sign the whole forum up for the Focus on the Family mailing list! Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Shockeye on June 14, 2005, 12:02:50 PM Because after being a baby you are supposed to forget you ever saw a nipple until you are 35. I just thought of the ultimate punishment for yall. Sign the whole forum up for the Focus on the Family mailing list! You like nipples and boobies just like the rest of us. Embrace it. Cherish it. Hit it. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Nebu on June 14, 2005, 12:03:22 PM Heh. It's true, I got to see Temple of DOom, Night of the Living Dead, the Exorcist and Full MEtal Jacket when I as a kid, but if there was ever a nekkid breast my eyes got covered. It's funny, but I raised my daughter in an almost opposite manner. I don't care if she hears profanity or sees nudity, I just try to protect her from seeing gratuitous violence. Maybe working all those Friday nights in the ER had something to do with it?!? Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: HaemishM on June 14, 2005, 12:08:00 PM THERE'S NAUGHT WRONG WIT' NAKED BOOBIES, LAD!
Look, the double entendre of 1) putting Lindsay Fucking Lohan in a kid's movie and 2) calling it FULLY FUCKING LOADED while reducing the star's breast size is just delicious. Secondly, I think they released the story just to get some press talking about a FUCKING HERBIE MOVIE. I watched Herbie movies as a kid, in the theater. You know what? Even then, I knew they were clown shoes. And I was ok with that. But it's 2005. The 21ST-FUCKING-CENTURY. Stop raping my childhood for ideas you can necromicon for DVD sales, you fucking mouse peckers. I don't have enough energy left after hating you to light you on fire one body hair at a time. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Paelos on June 14, 2005, 12:08:51 PM The most offensive piece of shit I've seen in years is Hell's Kitchen. That host needs to be executed in town square. My wife and I caught some of this, and mainly we were amazed at the so-called "diners" lined up to eat in this fake "restaurant." The show asks you to believe that these people are real paying customers. But who would pay money to wait 4 hours for food cooked by a bunch of amateurs, and get cussed out by an insane Brit for complaining? I conclude that the "customers" are actors, and the show is a mean-spirited sham. I think you just summed up the reality TV genre. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Shockeye on June 14, 2005, 12:11:00 PM But it's 2005. The 21ST-FUCKING-CENTURY. Stop raping my childhood for ideas you can necromicon for DVD sales, you fucking mouse peckers. I don't have enough energy left after hating you to light you on fire one body hair at a time. How long before they rape The Apple Dumping Gang? Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Mesozoic on June 14, 2005, 12:12:40 PM Turn on the TV. It is on nearly every channel. You're not following. This is Disney. They [try to] make money by pretending to be family-friendly while releasing any potential hawtness under other labels. The problem here - for them - is that her oversized tatas are in a film with the word "Disney" all over it. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: voodoolily on June 14, 2005, 01:01:38 PM Is that why the Mickey Mouse Club has become the Shameless Whore Factory? I'm surprised Disney hasn't tried to sue Britney Spears or Christina Aguilera for taking their careers in un-family directions.
ALso, the Focus on the Family thing (you're gonna LOVE Colorado, Paelos!): if you go on their mailing list you end up costing them lots of money over time in paper and postage. I know someone who's been on their list for years for this very reason. If you could convince hundreds of non-fundies or atheists to do the same, it could cost them thousands. Which is still a drop in the huge bucket, but hey. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: shiznitz on June 14, 2005, 01:02:47 PM How long before they rape The Apple Dumping Gang? Won't happen. Neverland Ranch has been sold. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Abagadro on June 14, 2005, 01:07:52 PM I love Hell's Kitchen. I've been a Gordon Ramsey fan for a while. He kicks ass. And if anyone thinks that it isn't very "real," they have never worked in a Kitchen. My guess is that the customers are basically a free ticket TV audience who are promised a free meal. My favorite is when he told some bimbos who went up to the hot plate to go back to plastic surgery land.
Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Yegolev on June 14, 2005, 01:12:15 PM This is a serious question. Why is someone's natural physical attributes cause for alarm from parents? Because fathers and sons don't know how to explain to their wife or mother why they simply must sit through all of the credits of a Herbie movie. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Shockeye on June 14, 2005, 01:12:59 PM This is a serious question. Why is someone's natural physical attributes cause for alarm from parents? I don't think those "attributes" were all that "natural". Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: voodoolily on June 14, 2005, 01:15:17 PM If that were true, they wouldn't have shrunk when she did.
Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: WayAbvPar on June 14, 2005, 01:27:24 PM If that were true, they wouldn't have shrunk when she did. Exactly. Unless she had them yanked out. I always assumed they were fake until she stopped eating. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: voodoolily on June 14, 2005, 01:33:49 PM I figured they were real because they generally went with the rest of her body. (Hell, big boobs go with anything) She had curves everywhere else. She was rather buxom for a teenager. Which means that if she doesn't keep her weight down, she will grow a big fat cauliflower ass.
Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: schild on June 14, 2005, 01:35:56 PM I'd take cauliflower ass over....that thing she happens to be now. She's hideous.
Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: voodoolily on June 14, 2005, 01:37:55 PM Yeah she's not really pulling off the whole willowy sylph thing. She is no Gwyneth Paltrow.
Edit: do you guys remember when CHristina Ricci lost all that weight, and then she just looked like an even bigger crack baby than before? Tragic. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Shockeye on June 14, 2005, 01:41:26 PM Edit: do you guys remember when CHristina Ricci lost all that weight, and then she just looked like an even bigger crack baby than before? Tragic. The forehead, it scares me! (http://cache.eonline.com/On/Rank/Shows/Bachelorettes03/Gallery/Images/22.ricci.jpg) Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Nebu on June 14, 2005, 01:41:56 PM My guess is that she signed a contract recently to do some of those before/after shots for Meth billboards. I hear there's good money in that kind of stuff for ex-child stars. At least that's what this other girl told me.
(http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:xCltir4GEO4J:http://home-1.worldonline.nl/~hcdeboer/images/danagary.jpg) Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: voodoolily on June 14, 2005, 01:42:35 PM "Um, excuse me honey, you got a little FAS on your face."
It's called BANGS, girl! Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: WayAbvPar on June 14, 2005, 01:42:44 PM Edit: do you guys remember when CHristina Ricci lost all that weight, and then she just looked like an even bigger crack baby than before? Tragic. The forehead, it scares me! (http://cache.eonline.com/On/Rank/Shows/Bachelorettes03/Gallery/Images/22.ricci.jpg) That is no forehead. That is at least a fivehead. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Mesozoic on June 14, 2005, 01:45:27 PM I once told a girl she had enough room on her forehead for a second face.
I'm not sure why I'm sharing that. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: voodoolily on June 14, 2005, 01:46:38 PM Maybe this is what she was thinking when she made this new decision (http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/ricci%20gives%20up%20on%20plucking%20eyebrows). Like she can just grow over her hewj cranium
Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Nebu on June 14, 2005, 02:07:26 PM Maybe this is what she was thinking when she made this new decision (http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/ricci%20gives%20up%20on%20plucking%20eyebrows). Like she can just grow over her hewj cranium Does it frighten anyone else to know that some people consider this "news"? Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: WayAbvPar on June 14, 2005, 02:08:45 PM Maybe this is what she was thinking when she made this new decision (http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/ricci%20gives%20up%20on%20plucking%20eyebrows). Like she can just grow over her hewj cranium Does it frighten anyone else to know that some people consider this "news"? This, of all things, qualifies as Useless News. We may have to close the forum down now that such a perfect example has been uncovered. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Bunk on June 14, 2005, 02:41:34 PM You guys beat me to it. I just sat here with my mouth agape looking at that. Someone probably was actually paid real money for writing that story.
News at 11: Julia Roberts has decided to switch from anti-perspirant to deoderant. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Prospero on June 14, 2005, 03:39:57 PM Perhaps she's getting ready to play ncle Fester in a new Addam's family movie. It's the only logical explanation. That or she's never heard of Rogaine.
Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Samwise on June 15, 2005, 08:51:29 AM On the original topic: you know, I was actually considering seeing this movie until I heard this.
Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Strazos on June 15, 2005, 09:14:20 AM "They may take our lives, but they'll never take Our TITTIES!!!"
And yes, this is completely Useless News. Now we just need to be able to patch the GHEY out of movies before they go to DVD. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Shockeye on June 15, 2005, 09:58:31 AM Now we just need to be able to patch the GHEY out of movies before they go to DVD. Our president is behind that. Oh wait, I thought you meant "the gay". Not sure where the Republicans stand on "the GHEY". Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Strazos on June 16, 2005, 04:24:36 PM Shockeye makes me laugh...
But I'm not sure if it's because I can imagine him saying what he types... Or because he still hase "Super Fat Cat" as his avatar. Title: Re: Lohan too busty for Disney. Post by: Arnold on June 20, 2005, 01:50:08 AM Heh. It's true, I got to see Temple of DOom, Night of the Living Dead, the Exorcist and Full MEtal Jacket when I as a kid, but if there was ever a nekkid breast my eyes got covered. What's weird is I can remember being a kid and seeing boobies and the occasional full frontal on "The 8 O'clock movie" from San Francisco's KTVU. That's not a cable channel, folks. It's hard to believe this insane fundy lashout on "indecency". I've got no fucking television connection in my house. If all these damn fundies were so worried about what their kids see, they'd do the same. Oh, and they have NO FUCKING REASON to complain about TV if they have an internet connection. The worst their kids will see is a softcore on Skinemax. With the internet, the hardest core porn out there is available, for free. |