tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post7520032305938453394..comments2024-03-28T16:22:14.888-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire"Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-65599314548381364702013-12-01T16:43:12.287-08:002013-12-01T16:43:12.287-08:00"She's not Cate Blanchett or Miranda Rich..."She's not Cate Blanchett or Miranda Richardson."<br /><br />Yeah, Blanchett is real purty, the most beautiful woman that ever lived. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-939874162961018322013-12-01T07:50:52.304-08:002013-12-01T07:50:52.304-08:00Also, I don't think that J-Law got to be where...Also, I don't think that J-Law got to be where she is just because tween girls want to be her BFF. No girl gets to be that big without making a lot of middle aged men salivate:<br /><br />http://www.hitfix.com/in-contention/off-the-carpet-american-hustle-finally-enters-the-oscar-race/2<br /><br />American Hustle was supposed to be Amy Adams' star vehicle, with Rosenfeld's wife a minor part. But Russell wanted JLaw, and the part got puffed up bigtime. <br /><br />Adams must absolutely love JLaw. She must truly be happy for the success of this wonderful actress, 16 years her junior. <br /><br />(s*rc*sm.)d.....noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-82622102532512823552013-11-30T20:43:06.468-08:002013-11-30T20:43:06.468-08:00Anon 2:38 PM, I think the breakup of the studio sy...Anon 2:38 PM, I think the breakup of the studio system was harder on women than men. For HBD reasons, most of the time, men are better at navigating a freebooting system, whereas women are better in a rep/company system. At the end of the day, they're still women and have the work/life thing to deal with in a more urgent way.<br /><br />Bottom line, I don't think J-Law is much of an actress. She's not Cate Blanchett or Miranda Richardson. That's really what it comes down to after the hype machine has lost steam. People really do come to their senses and say, "what was all that about?"<br /><br />OK Dave, I'll let you be the judge of who was America's Sweetheart. Somehow I always thought that from 1990 to 2002 J-Rob was the AS-in-chief, with Meg and Sandra as Veep, and Speaker, just in case anything awful happened to the woman who answered that 3 a.m. phone call.<br /><br />In any case, it's JLaw now.<br /><br />And one thing's for certain: the suits can import our superheroes from Britain - but America's Sweetheart is one job only a native-born American woman can do.d.....noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-37328574550639013272013-11-30T14:38:56.347-08:002013-11-30T14:38:56.347-08:00"d..., when lots of women get a shot at Holly..."d..., when lots of women get a shot at Hollywood, the industry is using them up and spitting them out."<br /><br />I think it's less the industry than the culture. If you hang around the industry, you are surrounded by hardworking professionals as writers, crew, directors, and etc. While there are crazy creative types in Hollywood, most are there to do the job, and movie-making is like managing an army. <br /><br />The problem is what happens off the set. Once you become famous, so many leeches say they are your friends, invite you to parties, offer you drugs, and etc. And then the paparazzi a**holes won't leave you alone. That's when the real trouble happens. It's temptations away from work than the work itself. To be sure, the stress of work makes many celebrities look for relief, and it can come in drugs and other excesses. But this is a much bigger problem in the music industry as rock culture tends to be more sleazy(even in the manner of production). <br /><br />In many cases, industry people try to be very protective of their stars. They know all about temptations and dangers that can ruin a career. Those around Tom Cruise certainly tried to keep him under wraps, but then, the goofball went his own way and was suddenly jumping on sofas and saying ridiculous things. <br />Strangely enough, the problem with Cruise isn't so much that he's out of control as he too much of a control freak who sees himself as the master of the universe or some such. <br /><br />But even when everything seems to be going right, some actors and actresses just can't find the roles they need. <br />There are meat-and-potato actors/actresses who are fit for many kinds of roles. John Wayne was the perfect example of this. As big and tough as he was, there was something of the 'every man' about him, which is why so many people liked him in movie after movie. He wasn't so much a tough guy as a big guy who could be tough when need be. He could star in any kind of Hollywood western. In contrast, there was something very special about Eastwood in looks and style, and only certain kinds of roles were right for him. Even in a mediocre movie, Wayne never seems wasted, but Eastwood can seem like a total fish out of water in a movie that doesn't specifically tailor to his special qualities. <br /><br />Some actors and actresses, by looks and/or style, were meant to be special, and they need special roles. <br />Audrey Hepburn was beautiful and talented in a very special way, but that meant she wasn't fit for most ordinary roles. She could totally shine in a role in BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY'S but seemed out of place in most other roles, which is why only a handful of her roles are memorable. Ashley Gere who played Alice Cullen in TWILIGHT is like Hepburn. She would be perfect for special roles but wouldn't be right for most roles. Gems may be more precious than stones, but they are not for all occasions as stones are. Jennifer Lawrence is a stone actress in looks and style, and she should never forget it. She has a natural quality like the singer Cady Groves. Her mistake would be trying to be a glamorous star, a mistake Groves might make as well if she wants to be the next Katy Perry or some such crap. <br /><br />Some handsome men tend to put the audience more at ease than others, which is why Paul Newman had a more successful career than Robert Redford. Newman always had that 'cool hand luke' smile that made him so accessible and likable. But Redford had a rock-like intensity that always created a distance between him and the audience. He was right for only certain kinds of movies. <br /><br />But an hardy actress like Isabelle Huppert can star in just about any role. Pretty as she is, she was never fragile. She has the hunger of a real person in her eyes. <br /><br />Another problem is, of course, the peak-thing. Once an actor or actress reaches the peak, he or she wants to stay there and may only look for BIG roles. Or if he or she wants to prove his/her worth as 'artist', he/she may go for overly serious roles that strain his/her credibility as an actor. <br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-2005289432784922272013-11-30T13:48:05.792-08:002013-11-30T13:48:05.792-08:00My point is that Hollywood eats actresses up and s...<i>My point is that Hollywood eats actresses up and spits them out and Meg Ryan is a perfect example of that. There are many others.<br /><br />The Jennifer Lawrence undertow is truly fascinating. David Thomson hated Hunger Games I and predicted that the franchise would bottle up her talent and destroy her but the opposite seems to have happened - she's being cast in everything. She won the Oscar for a part that she was 10 years too young to play because the Academy wanted to build her up and now this creation is sucking the oxygen out of opportunities for every actress, not only in their 20s, but in their 30s. I've heard that the main female in American Hustle was supposed to be Amy Adams but - Russell changed the focus to Lawrence. She is playing a woman who in real life was close to 50 during the main parts of the film's action. Why?<br /><br />Like the Hunger Games franchise itself, it's a form of contagion: J-Lawitis.</i><br /><br />d..., when lots of women get a shot at Hollywood, the industry is using them up and spitting them out. But, every once in a while an actress comes along who doesn't get used up and spit out. She ends up starring in a bunch of movies, sometimes in roles that don't match her physical type.<br /><br />The second situation looks a lot like what happens to male movie stars. Giving lots of women a lead role or two: awful. Giving one woman a bunch of leads and it's awful too. J-lawitis taking all these roles from actresses so they don't get their 15 minutes is really bad, too.robnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-1244902149263259492013-11-30T13:45:06.415-08:002013-11-30T13:45:06.415-08:00Bullock had long dry spells and most of her roles ...Bullock had long dry spells and most of her roles have been pretty crappy. <br /><br />GRAVITY was her role of a lifetime. <br /><br />Roberts could have done much better if she didn't go into SERIOUS mode and take on roles she wasn't fit for. <br /><br />It's like Demi Moore made a fool out of herself with SCARLETT. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-65797463570872899402013-11-30T08:01:34.003-08:002013-11-30T08:01:34.003-08:00Julia Roberts had a more diverse collection of rol...Julia Roberts had a more diverse collection of roles, but Meg Ryan was Hollywood's go-to female star for romantic comedies from 1989 to 2001. Getting pigeonholed in that genre is probably more relevant to her career's arc than any plastic surgery she's had. I'd be surprised if Bullock and Roberts haven't had work done too.Dave Pinsenhttp://twitter.com/dpinsennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-27071127925954044882013-11-30T02:49:33.337-08:002013-11-30T02:49:33.337-08:00If you want to think that Meg Ryan was America'...If you want to think that Meg Ryan was America's Sweetheart, fine, there isn't an American's Sweetheart Comintern, but I think you're distorting the record. At least add and subtract properly. From 1989 to 1998 is 9 years, not 12.<br /> <br />Yes, there is IMDB. Which tells me that in 1990 a movie named Pretty Woman was released. The actress in that became the biggest female star of her time, not Meg Ryan. <br /><br />Roberts' only competition as alpha female was (and is) Sandra Bullock, who is doing quite well at 50 or so, in comparison to Ryan.<br /><br />What's wrong with Meg Ryan isn't that she's 52, but that she's had multiple disastrous plastic surgeries as opposed to Bullock, whose work is quite artistic. I've seen 60 year old diner waitresses who look better than Ryan.<br /><br />My point is that Hollywood eats actresses up and spits them out and Meg Ryan is a perfect example of that. There are many others. <br /><br />The Jennifer Lawrence undertow is truly fascinating. David Thomson hated Hunger Games I and predicted that the franchise would bottle up her talent and destroy her but the opposite seems to have happened - she's being cast in everything. She won the Oscar for a part that she was 10 years too young to play because the Academy wanted to build her up and now this creation is sucking the oxygen out of opportunities for every actress, not only in their 20s, but in their 30s. I've heard that the main female in American Hustle was supposed to be Amy Adams but - Russell changed the focus to Lawrence. She is playing a woman who in real life was close to 50 during the main parts of the film's action. Why?<br /><br />Like the Hunger Games franchise itself, it's a form of contagion: J-Lawitis.d.....noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-1547044165404586582013-11-29T21:49:43.714-08:002013-11-29T21:49:43.714-08:00"But look at Meg Ryan now, not a pretty sight..."But look at Meg Ryan now, not a pretty sight."<br /><br />People age. It's a natural process. Some age worse than others. <br /><br />Meg was the new Goldie Hawn for a while. I never liked her personally, and her 'orgasm' thing in Sleepless in Seattle was disgusting. <br /><br />But the thing that famous actresses should avoid like a plague is "SERIOUSNESS". <br />Many of them feel this inferiority complex as mere 'entertainers' not taken seriously by intelligent people, and they seek their true worth as 'artists'.<br /><br />More often than not, this amounts to some clever male(or some foul feminist) director talking them into taking their clothes off and making fools of themselves.<br /><br />We hear so much about the intelligence, independence, and strength of women, but they fall for this shit all the time.<br /><br />Kristen Stewart made a damn fool of herself in ON THE ROAD, an crappy 'art film' whose sole use for her was to make her a dirty nudie scene. <br />Holly Hunter was never the same again after her dumb role in PIANO<br /> And though EYES WIDE SHUT is a very great movie, Kubrick trampled all over Kidman, and she was never the same. <br /><br />These bims think they are proving their artistic worth by 'going all the way' and 'pushing the envelope', but 9 times out of 10, they are just being made to bare their ass and act stupid. <br /><br />After they do it, they realize what damn fools they were, but they try to repress the shame by taking on even more more extreme roles. <br /><br />Keep you clothes on, ladies. <br /><br />There are exceptions to be sure--Lynch's use of nudity in MUL DR and Imamura's movies--, but generally, actresses get suckered by 'artists' over and over. <br /><br />I don't know if Ryan did nudie scenes, but took on some horrible 'serious' roles, like in WHEN A MAN LOVES A WOMAN, a film that says a white male is guilty even when he's a nice guy. You see, by being a pillar of strength and patience to his troubled wife, he made her emotionally dependent on him, furthering her frustration and shame. <br /><br />GIMME A BREAK!!!<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-46884960802124316742013-11-29T21:36:36.370-08:002013-11-29T21:36:36.370-08:00"But look at Meg Ryan now, not a pretty sight...<i>"But look at Meg Ryan now, not a pretty sight. And we could argue forever about how long she was America's Sweetheart, I say it wasn't 12 years, it was about 18 months after when Sally Met Harry."</i><br /><br />Meg Ryan is 52 now, and no, we couldn't argue forever about how long she was America's sweetheart, because we have IMDB. Harry Baldwin was right: it was about 12 years, from When Harry Met Sally (1989) to Kate and Leopold<br />(2001), her last romantic comedy role. In between were Sleepless in Seattle (1993), You've Got Mail (1998), etc.David Pinsenhttp://twitter.com/dpinsennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-91664665212237653602013-11-29T17:14:07.614-08:002013-11-29T17:14:07.614-08:00But look at Meg Ryan now, not a pretty sight. And ...But look at Meg Ryan now, not a pretty sight. And we could argue forever about how long she was America's Sweetheart, I say it wasn't 12 years, it was about 18 months after when Sally Met Harry. But it doesn't matter, she's forgotten now, her life is a mess. She got eaten up and spat out.<br /><br />I hope Lawrence doesn't marry an actor, either. Marrying an actor would only be marrying down. She is a remarkable phenom. When phenoms age...Meryl Streep didn't make her first HW movie until she was 28, in a featured but basically bit part. Lawrence won't be 28 for another five years.<br /><br />Maybe her role model shouldn't be an actress, but Christian Bale, who has been reinventing himself since he was 12.d.....noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-10929388690828624962013-11-29T16:26:35.953-08:002013-11-29T16:26:35.953-08:00I wasn't suggesting she'd marry for career...I wasn't suggesting she'd marry for career purposes, just speculating she might be savvy enough not to marry an actor. She could also do what some actresses have done and marry a wealthy non-Hollywood man.Dave Pinsenhttp://twitter.com/dpinsennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-86861036422332923062013-11-29T16:19:22.932-08:002013-11-29T16:19:22.932-08:00Does anyone remember when Meg Ryan was America'...<br /><i>Does anyone remember when Meg Ryan was America's sweetheart?</i><br /><br />Of course we do, she occupied that position for a good twelve years or so. That's nothing to disparage.Harry Baldwinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-34412881588401917942013-11-29T15:55:06.203-08:002013-11-29T15:55:06.203-08:00"Eventually getting superpowers by becoming a..."Eventually getting superpowers by becoming a vampire is the creation of equality within the marriage. The feminists who write Twilight do not like the fact that Edward is so superior to Bella so they concoct a circumstance to bestow powers similar to his. But that occurs after spending two movies of Edward qualifying himself to Bella."<br /><br />But Bella could have had 'equal powers' without the marriage, and there are plenty of unmarried female vampires in TWILIGHT without great power. So, I don't think the power has anything to do with marriage. Bella initially hopes to be a vampire because she fears the aging process and wants to be with Edward forever. But the more she hangs around them, the more she becomes fascinated with the power as well. <br /><br />Even so, TWILIGHT is ambivalent about the power. Vampires have the power to overpower humans and suck out their blood. But the Cullens refuse their naturally intended power against humans; they've nullified the very nature of their power. So, they have vamp power but don't use it. <br /><br />With their great power, one might argue they could use it to help humans as superheroes do. But Cullens don't do that either. Cullens know in the first movie that vampires are roaming the region and killing innocent humans, but they don't intervene to save humans. They won't kill humans but they won't try to save humans from vampires either, and they make an exception only for Bella because she becomes 'like family' through Edward. <br /><br />Thus, as great as their power is, they use it defensively to preserve their clan rather than offensively, as superheroes do, to do good for society. Carlisle helps out people but as a regular doctor. <br /><br />Cullens have the power to help mankind, but if they acted on it, they would be discovered for what they are, and that is not allowed by vampire law, so they mostly keep to themselves. Also, they prefer the quiet life and want to be left alone. <br /><br />So, power dynamics is very passive/aggressive. And this is also the feature of the relationship between Edward and Bella. Edward is a vampire but doesn't want to be. Bella is not a vampire but wants to be. Thus, both are both hunter and hunted. <br /><br />But all said and done, TWILIGHT works because it's really well-made. If it were un-well-made, who would care about its 'meaning'.<br />THE HOST, another Meyer movie adaptation, has some very interesting ideas but is so badly made that it was dismissed and forgotten on the day of its release. Poorly cast too, except for William Hurt. <br /><br />Sometimes the making redeems the material. I was looking back on Sailer's blog post on SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN, and I agree that it is one of the most cynically concocted Hollywood projects ever: let's mix what girls like with what boys like and sell tickets to both demographics. I can see how the entire project was conceived by the marketing department and worked on by a whole bunch of writers with formula on their mind. <br />But the direction is awesome, casting is picture perfect, and the art design is mind-blowing. Such a cynically devised work shouldn't work--and 99 times out of 100, they don't--, but SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN is a real triumph--if not of the film story, then of the film-making.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-2510640292751596692013-11-29T15:47:28.789-08:002013-11-29T15:47:28.789-08:00"Even better than having one man commit to th..."Even better than having one man commit to them is having two men commit to them. Edward is the alpha male and Jacob is the beta male. When the alpha is not around, the beta is there to provide emotional support."<br /><br />I can see how fans might get a kick out of how a girl is chased by two guys, but Bella is not exactly chased by Edward. He tries to keep his distance in part 1 and in part 2, takes off, though, to be sure, for her own good. So, it becomes like Jacob is after her, but she's after Edward(almost as obsessively as Isabelle Adjani in <a href="http://youtu.be/5VdHOEMtSvM" rel="nofollow">THE STORY OF ADELE H.</a> Adjani was also the woman in the remake of <a href="http://youtu.be/kgV6YPC7uog" rel="nofollow">NOSFERATU.</a> The movie wasn't very good, but she had the perfect look for the role.) <br />As for Jacob, Bella likes him but doesn't feel romantically for him. She wants him as a friend, maybe a 'younger brother' type. She is turned on by his body at the animal level, but she never feels any mad passion for him. It's more of an affection. Ideally, she wants him only as a friend and rebuffs him when he tries to kiss her in New Moon. She does kiss him in Eclipse, but only to console him after he freaks after finding out that she is engaged to Edward. (While I like Jacob, couldn't she just peck him a few times? Was kissing him 13 times on the lips--I counted them--really necessary? I mean we don't want her smooching Geronimo here.)<br /><br />If anything, Edward is the natural beta type while Jacob is more the alpha type. To be sure, both guys have a soft side. Edward, as a human, was just some slim, even skinny, guy who was dying of the Spanish Influenza before he was turned into a vampire. He was never happy as a vampire, and he never took advantage of the powers he had. Real alpha vampires feed on humans and exult in their power, like the Negro and 'white trash' vamps that form a trio. Before Bella came along, Edward just felt bad about being a 'monster'. Hardly an alpha type. And even his approach with Bella is soft and gentle, gradual and cautious. <br />Jacob, in contrast, tends to act on his feelings. He's always making his moves on Bella; trying to hold her hands, exploding at the other date at the screening of FACE PUNCH, the movie within the movie. The red bastard even kisses Bella without her permission(and it was good of her to knock some sense into his wolfish savage head). <br />Edward if more the refined prince type, Jacob is more the rough huntsman type--and the archetypal dichotomy exists in SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN too. <br />Jacob only turns relatively beta in BREAKING DAWN PART 2 where Bella kicks his butt. You almost feel sorry for him. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-34745887879282035442013-11-29T15:42:51.724-08:002013-11-29T15:42:51.724-08:00"People are mistaken about Twilight. The stor..."People are mistaken about Twilight. The story is about a slightly above average looking girl that somehow manages to get long-term, committed relationships from men that are way out of her league. She does this simply by being a girl and not offering anything in return."<br /><br />This may be true of the books(which I haven't read), but Kristen Stewart has undeniable beauty in the movies(though she lacks the full-bodied womanly qualities of, say, 'Rosalie'.) Stewart is the forever-girl type, just like some of the leading 'men' are the forever-boy types. <br /><br />Of course, she does it by simply 'being a girl'. I mean how else does love work? "I'm a girl, plus I'll give you my iPod and bag of cookies if you love me." ???<br /><br />"The Twilight story is popular among women because it presents a fantasy where the men they are attracted to don't simply use them as sexual holdovers in-between hotter women. They imagine that an apex male will notice their unique inner beauty and seek to build a life with them, without worrying about competition from other women."<br /><br />Again maybe in the book. In the movie, however, Bella is obviously pretty and, in a small town like Forks, she's not gonna have much competition. She attracts a lot of boys on the first day, so it's clearly established that there's something about her that turns on guys. <br />There are fairytale elements in TWILIGHT, but Bella is both the witch and the princess. Unlike the pure and innocent princesses of fairytales, there is a dark obsessiveness about Bella, and she knows what she wants. Like Morgana in EXCALIBUR, she wants it even if it might kill her and rob her of her soul. And yet, there is a good and light-hearted side of her too. I think it's this ambivalence of innocence and nihilism at the core of Bella that fascinates a lot of fans. Some horror fans complain that TWILIGHT whitewashed the dark elements of vampire tales, but that's what makes it all the more strange. The vampire world and human world, instead of being black and white contrasts, are of grey and grey contrasts and continuities. <br /><br />In the movie(as opposed to the books, of which I only know thru wikipedia), the meeting of Bella and Edward is not presented as homely girl meets gorgeous guy. Rather, it's beauty meets beauty. But there is a beastly side of Edward because he's a monster, and there is also a beastly side to Bella because the monstrousness is partly what turns her on. In BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, the good and pure woman tames the beast, lifts the curse, and the beast becomes a prince. In TWILIGHT, Bella is turned on by Edward's beauty(before she knows anything about his power), but then is fascinated by his power, and in wanting to be with him, she wants to be a 'monster' too. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-10158326258598627132013-11-29T12:27:15.186-08:002013-11-29T12:27:15.186-08:00People are mistaken about Twilight. The story is a...People are mistaken about Twilight. The story is about a slightly above average looking girl that somehow manages to get long-term, committed relationships from men that are way out of her league. She does this simply by being a girl and not offering anything in return.<br /><br />The Twilight story is popular among women because it presents a fantasy where the men they are attracted to don't simply use them as sexual holdovers in-between hotter women. They imagine that an apex male will notice their unique inner beauty and seek to build a life with them, without worrying about competition from other women.<br /><br />Even better than having one man commit to them is having two men commit to them. Edward is the alpha male and Jacob is the beta male. When the alpha is not around, the beta is there to provide emotional support.<br /><br />Eventually getting superpowers by becoming a vampire is the creation of equality within the marriage. The feminists who write Twilight do not like the fact that Edward is so superior to Bella so they concoct a circumstance to bestow powers similar to his. But that occurs after spending two movies of Edward qualifying himself to Bella.mapnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-15000755092449744702013-11-29T08:07:49.784-08:002013-11-29T08:07:49.784-08:00"It looks like she's dropped at least 20l..."It looks like she's dropped at least 20lbs since then though."<br /><br />No way. She looked fine on Letterman.<br /><br />I'm getting to like her. Her normal, married, unshowbiz brother accompanied her to the show. He looked grumpy and unimpressed by the razzmatazz. He's in computers or something normal. Can't be arsed to look it up.<br /><br />As far as Jenn (we're that close) marrying a studio exec, etc., do you understand the psychology of actresses, and of Hollywood? A few actresses have done that as a means of boosting their career, but she's already in a place where I can't think of any previous actress has gone, not even Julia Roberts. She is the star of one of the most successful franchises of all time, she's doing prestige projects with prestige names like David O. Russell (who is presently unmarried...forget I said that) and Christian Bale, etc., etc., etc. And people like her. <br /><br />She's unique.<br /><br />Her dating pool is very small. <br /><br />It will be interesting to watch what happens to this meteor-girl, HBD wise.d.....noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-59337274566097135272013-11-28T22:00:05.884-08:002013-11-28T22:00:05.884-08:00Jennifer Lawrence looked great in Sixties getup in...Jennifer Lawrence looked great in Sixties getup in that X-Men prequel. It looks like she's dropped at least 20lbs since then though.<br /><br />Re Hollywood pressuring her into ultra thinness: it's odd to think of her being pressured at all at this point. With blockbuster action roles and a best actress Oscar under her belt, she should be set financially as well as professionally. Maybe she'll ride this out for the rest of her 20s and then marry a wealthy producer or studio exec. Dave Pinsenhttp://twitter.com/dpinsennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-58210292104142177582013-11-28T11:21:36.418-08:002013-11-28T11:21:36.418-08:00Take 'sports' and 'violence'. One ...<i>Take 'sports' and 'violence'. One of Bella's main fascination with vampires is their power,and vampires sure can hit a baseball.</i><br /><br />Women may not like sports, but they sure like athletes.<br /><br />Yawn.Thursdayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13002311410445623799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-40017627662168319612013-11-28T05:41:53.492-08:002013-11-28T05:41:53.492-08:00I dunno, freud, Gale Sayers was a pretty tough SOB...I dunno, freud, Gale Sayers was a pretty tough SOB. So was Gale Gillingham, a Hall of Fame lineman on the great Packers teams of the 60s.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-59746940696955878632013-11-28T01:56:03.748-08:002013-11-28T01:56:03.748-08:00i haven't seen the second installment, but the...i haven't seen the second installment, but the first struck me as a feeble allegorical critique of reality television and the willingness of fame-hungry commoners (the genetically unblessed) to sacrifice their ''authenticity'' or humanity in pursuit of stardom. even still, the takeaway was that if you're a Really Good Girl who remains True to Herself you'll outshine your Machiavellian rivals and win in the end. <br /><br />i admit the nature of 'The Reaping' contradicts my interpretation, but the notion that fame corrupts and should be avoided is not exactly uncommon in small-town America ("the districts"). <br /><br />Jennifer Lawrence is about as appealing as a girl can get while still remaining "wifeable". She's what white girls with good parents aspire to be.Happy Birthdayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13187440757648381636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-60110940055179510812013-11-27T21:20:25.077-08:002013-11-27T21:20:25.077-08:00All I can offer here is Mr. Derbyshire's incis...<br />All I can offer here is Mr. Derbyshire's incisive ""Do you ever feel, as I do, watching some old movie, or listening to the pop lyrics of the 1930s and 1940s, like a kid who's wandered into a room where grown-ups are talking?”Auntie Analoguenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-78747923309763658172013-11-27T19:49:29.087-08:002013-11-27T19:49:29.087-08:00She's 8 inches shorter than Gale though. Who i...<i>She's 8 inches shorter than Gale though. Who is a guy. A guy named Gale. It's what they call transgressive.</i><br /><br />It's meant to be sophisticated WN code for "Gael," duh.Scott Irisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-3286006349810157742013-11-27T19:46:40.890-08:002013-11-27T19:46:40.890-08:00"A former Clinton Administration speechwriter..."<i>A former Clinton Administration speechwriter, Ross was best known for Seabiscuit,<br />A former Clinton Administration speechwriter, Ross was best known for Seabiscuit</i> [source: my own past writings, as usual]"<br /><br />Ross actually had a few mid-to-upper-range screenwriting credits before that. Probably not A-list but he did a little film for Tom Hanks that no one remembers, especially not this time of year (the one to cement his reputation for left-lib propaganda was "Dave," a real fossil of the P.C. heights of the early 90s). In contrast to other Oscar-bait movies about horses <a href="http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2003/SBSCT.php" rel="nofollow">"Seabiscuit" brought in a ton of money on the back end</a>.They Shoot Film Critics, Don't Theynoreply@blogger.com