|
Title: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: Triforcer on January 28, 2006, 12:02:01 PM http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,182979,00.html
Nope. Damn movie-making Bible-thumpers. Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: schild on January 28, 2006, 12:24:36 PM That's weak.
Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: HaemishM on February 01, 2006, 10:05:30 AM No, that's weak sauce.
Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: Alkiera on February 01, 2006, 10:54:28 AM weak sauce It's obviously just me, but I put this phrase in the same bin with the chuck norris and vin diesel comments. The label on that bin is 'Not Funny'. Alkiera Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: Mesozoic on February 01, 2006, 11:25:04 AM The the point is "OMG liberals hate games" then you really should just go for a Hillary Clinton tirade.
Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: Righ on February 12, 2006, 02:18:43 AM weak sauce It's obviously just me, but I put this phrase in the same bin with the chuck norris and vin diesel comments. The label on that bin is 'Not Funny'.You'll really enjoy this site (http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/) then, as it allows you to make your own stupid Chuck Norris T-shirts. Such as this: (http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a352/righ/Norris.jpg) Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: Ironwood on February 13, 2006, 03:55:04 AM http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,182979,00.html Nope. Damn movie-making Bible-thumpers. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4706092.stm Which kinda fucks your theory that everything is modern new age and wondrous. The place is designed, built and thrives on Image. Guess which image is not acceptable at the mo ? You horrid wee man. Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: Murgos on February 13, 2006, 05:54:48 AM http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4706092.stm Which kinda fucks your theory that everything is modern new age and wondrous. The place is designed, built and thrives on Image. Guess which image is not acceptable at the mo ? You horrid wee man. Did you read that article? I'm not saying it's not correct but, god damn thats some piss poor writing: Quote But the film industry was still reluctant to cast an openly gay man in a leading role, he said. followed byQuote His career in mainstream films "really took off once I'd come out and said I was gay", he said. and thier example of US actors that had to hide thier sexuality? Montgomery Clift and Rock Hudson? Hi, my GRANDPARENTS watched them. Couldn't they find a modern gay actor who was suffering at the hands of prejudice to show, you know, the CURRENT state of prejudice in Hollywood? D- Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: Ironwood on February 13, 2006, 06:08:52 AM Eddie Murphy.
So I'm told. But really, I don't care. Anyway, I think it's different if you're British and Gay. That's ok. Indeed, some find it strange to run into British people who aren't either A - Gay or B - An evil genius with plans to take over the world and then crush it into submission by some kind of military force made up of robots. And they have finished Will & Grace - what other evidence do you need that they HATE TEH GAYS !!!one! Let's be honest here - considering Brokeback RidgeRider, the current hot topic of debate is gonna be gay cowboys eating pudding. No getting away from that. Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: Signe on February 13, 2006, 06:36:13 AM And don't forgeT... they all smoke. ALL of them!
Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: Righ on February 13, 2006, 08:03:03 AM All cowboys that eat pudding smoke?
Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: tazelbain on February 13, 2006, 08:14:32 AM And they have finished Will & Grace - what other evidence do you need that they HATE TEH GAYS !!!one! I don't think Hollywood "hates the gays." I think it about role discrimination. Being a known gay is a career limiting move even in a progress place like Hollywood because they still have to worry about marketing the film to the the rest of the country. Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: Ironwood on February 13, 2006, 08:22:10 AM Again, not serious. This thread started silly with a definite Trolling Intent. Don't expect me to take it seriously.
As to being discriminated for a role, someone really ought to show these guys the definition of the word 'Actor'. Especially considering that Hollywood produces so very, very few actors. I mean, Magneto wasn't Gay. Zebedee wasn't Gay. Mel Hutchwright wasn't gay. Gandalf wasn't Gay. Kurt Dussander wasn't Gay. MacBeth wasn't Gay. James Whale....well, ok, he was Gay. That's one. I had a point, but I got lost in Teh Gay. Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: Soln on February 13, 2006, 09:31:56 AM (http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0792844041.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg)
another great role by him FWIW Title: Re: City sues over GTA- is it in Kansas? South Dakota? Post by: HaemishM on February 13, 2006, 09:46:41 AM And don't forgeT... they all smoke. ALL of them! Smoke the pole, don't you know. |