|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 21, 2020 10:50:06 GMT
^^^^ I'm not going to have a back and forth with you. It's never productive, and always turns antagonistic. I'm cutting that shit off before it gets there. I made the point I wanted to make. If someone else wants to argue with you, though, I'll gladly eat my popcorn and watch. He really is adamant and staunchly pro-Leo. He's not a bad guy though as he doesn't get personal, so I enjoy having a good debate, but clearly me and you see eye-to-eye here and only one of us is a Denzel fanboy, so hopefully I've not lost my mind in the last 10 years. I didn't think I was alone. Or maybe I am getting too old - 85% of this site is 25 and under. Well, depends on the person. He knows how to act normal when he wants to, but when he zeros in on certain people he can behave like a typical troll.To me, he's not a good guy and that's why he just got banned from another forum. He got personal with people and worse. He's gotten personal with me, but I've just learned to disengage and move on. But he isn't helping the rep of Leo with this stuff, and if we had to take a wild guess who was responsible for dredging up those inactive accounts to take Leo from the bottom of this poll (poor Jeff Bridges, he had third place locked up ), look no further.... I'm glad you don't mind debating him though. The appeal definitely goes away when you have to deal with this dude for nearly a decade or whatever though, like myself.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Jun 21, 2020 10:51:28 GMT
How old are you? I really am curious. I'll keep that to myself, but I'm old enough to have watched a DiCaprio movie even before Titanic came out. Yeah, I don't know, Britney Spears was huge as soon as her first single came out. I think we have wildly different perspectives on this. Yeah, we're cool, no hard feelings, but your claim about DiCaprio not being the only reason The Man in the Iron Mask made as much money as it did is just egregiously revisionist. I could prove that by finding contemporaneous articles and reviews, but whatever.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Jun 21, 2020 10:55:43 GMT
if we had to take a wild guess who was responsible for dredging up those inactive accounts to take Leo from the bottom of this poll (poor Jeff Bridges, he had third place locked up ), look no further.... I know your life's mission is to spread the Denzel Gospel and obsess over thread views and polls, but I couldn't give a shit about polls on message boards. Good luck with your conspiracy theory, though. I think you should just go back to refreshing your thread so you can maybe, one day, surpass the "best thread ever" in view count
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 21, 2020 11:04:40 GMT
if we had to take a wild guess who was responsible for dredging up those inactive accounts to take Leo from the bottom of this poll (poor Jeff Bridges, he had third place locked up ), look no further.... I know your life's mission is to spread the Denzel Gospel and obsess over thread views and polls, but I couldn't give a shit about polls on message boards. I think you should go back to refreshing your thread so you can maybe, one day, surpass the "best thread ever" in view count Ehhh....this poll or polls on here, I could give less of a shit about (though I know it burned you to see Leo dead last for so long). Usually less than 75 of the same people voting. They are fun but meaningless (and I say this as someone whose favorite actress Nicole Kidman wins all the time here....they don't mean jack shit). It doesn't mean much, but your good friend pacinoyes seems to put a lot more value in them than I do. Perhaps you should be aiming that at him The Harris Poll however....oh, I loves that shit. Real world, relevant, broad demographic polled etc. The real deal.LOL! Also, for someone who just got banned from.a message board for obsessing over Leo, you sure like throwing stones at glass houses....pot, meet kettle.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,715
Likes: 2,293
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jun 21, 2020 11:16:59 GMT
He really is adamant and staunchly pro-Leo. He's not a bad guy though as he doesn't get personal, so I enjoy having a good debate, but clearly me and you see eye-to-eye here and only one of us is a Denzel fanboy, so hopefully I've not lost my mind in the last 10 years. I didn't think I was alone. Or maybe I am getting too old - 85% of this site is 25 and under. Well, depends on the person. He knows how to act normal when he wants to, but when he zeros in on certain people he can behave like a typical troll.To me, he's not a good guy and that's why he just got banned from another forum. He got personal with people and worse. He's gotten personal with me, but I've just learned to disengage and move on. But he isn't helping the rep of Leo with this stuff, and if we had to take a wild guess who was responsible for dredging up those inactive accounts to take Leo from the bottom of this poll (poor Jeff Bridges, he had third place locked up ), look no further.... I'm glad you don't mind debating him though. The appeal definitely goes away when you have to deal with this dude for nearly a decade or whatever though, like myself. I'm an objective viewer, and I always thought Denzel's appeal was stronger. More people at school talked about him in Training Day than Leo in Gangs of New York, for sure. I don't think Leo had that type of mass appeal that reaches every gap in the hemisphere that there was. You can say his appeal was more youthful or sappy in 2002 (having done only a few films at the time) and not the type that anyone older than 12 cares about. Maybe among people under the age of 13, Leo was like a household item tho, but not anywhere where the population was above 14+. Yet everyone thought Training Day was a gamechanger that impacted pop culture, and Denzel's career far more than anything Leo had done at that point. Yes I know he was in Titanic and The Man in the Iron Mask, but most people apart from women and young girls ignored him. It's not like I'm making this stuff up retrospectively. Nobody who reads my posts can possibly think I'm not American or not 35, but I never thought The Man in the Iron Mask made the money it did because of Leo. John Malkovich was a cooler dude to me in 1998, and I was in my teens. His psychotic villany in In the Line of Fire made a far greater impression in my mind, and I was sure if there was anything worth seeing about that Man in the Iron Mask movie, it was.... him. Yeah, I think he's ok.... but he seemed like he was born a Leo right from birth. And he does have some pretty bizarre takes. I know I do too, but at least I kind of admit it. But yeah... whatever, it's all good.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 21, 2020 11:48:11 GMT
He really is adamant and staunchly pro-Leo. He's not a bad guy though as he doesn't get personal, so I enjoy having a good debate, but clearly me and you see eye-to-eye here and only one of us is a Denzel fanboy, so hopefully I've not lost my mind in the last 10 years. I didn't think I was alone. Or maybe I am getting too old - 85% of this site is 25 and under. Well, depends on the person. To me, he's not a good guy and that's why he just got banned from another forum. He got personal with people and worse. He's gotten personal with mePonderous...........humorless........victim blaming (!) when Good God is the victim If anyone searches your posting history you've attacked me personally like a high school Twitter mob attacking a teen obsessed foot fetishist ........ you've posted "facts" that are provably false repeatedly.....you've posted on here non-ironically (!) that Little Things may get an Oscar nomination ...... ......I almost went blind from reading that sh it. ............you float conspiracy theories (or support them) constantly with no proof which is a pretty serious charge repeatedly instead of just being a legit contributor to the board and its spirit........you have the gall to say "poor Jeff Bridges" .......hey how about "poor pacinoyes" who has to read this sh it from you every few weeks? You are every moderators worst nightmare........I personally changed my daughters name from Denzel because every time I looked at the poor sweet child I saw your ugly posts. You provoke and then complain when the provocation is challenged AND run away instead of just winning the provocation which would be admirable at least - I've had fights with everybody ........ mhynson27 for just one example - but I'd talk to him about anything and I'd crack a joke and he'd laugh (maybe).......... heck I'd talk to him about Riley Reid right now and enthusiastically .....maybe even too enthusiastically ....... .........but even if I wouldn't or he wouldn't is it THAT big of a deal anyway to share with everyone all the time..... I mean you can post anything you want but...........should you (?) ..................because ..............If you are posting on here in reply to another poster solely ABOUT a whole other poster THIS much well.....
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 21, 2020 11:52:48 GMT
Well, depends on the person. To me, he's not a good guy and that's why he just got banned from another forum. He got personal with people and worse. He's gotten personal with me Ponderous...........humorless........victim blaming (!) when Good God is the victim If anyone searches you're posting history you've attacked me personally like a high school Twitter mob attacking a teen foot fetishist ........ you've posted "facts" that are provably false repeatedly.....you've posted on here non-ironically (!) that Little Things may get an Oscar nomination ...... ......I almost went blind from reading that sh it. ............you float conspiracy theories (or support them) constantly with no proof which is a pretty serious charge repeatedly instead of just being a legit contributor to the board and its spirit........you have the gall to say "poor Jeff Bridges" .......hey how about "poor pacinoyes" who has to read this sh it from you every few weeks? You are every moderators worst nightmare........I personally changed my daughters name from Denzel because every time I looked at the poor sweet child I saw your ugly posts. You provoke and then complain when the provocation is challenged AND run away instead of just winning the provocation which would be admirable at least - I've had fights with everybody ........@myhynson27 for just one example - but I'd talk to him about anything and I'd crack a joke and he'd laugh (maybe).......... heck I'd talk to him about Riley Reid right now and enthusiastically .....maybe even too enthusiastically ....... .........but even if I wouldn't or he wouldn't is it THAT big of a deal anyway to share with everyone all the time..... I mean you can post anything you want but...........should you (?) ..................because ..............If you are posting on here in reply to another poster solely ABOUT a whole other poster THIS much well..... I wasn't talking to you. This deadass "feud" you desperately want to make happen again, isn't happening. Everyone here has seen that movie. No one cares. Stop trying to make fetch happen.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,715
Likes: 2,293
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jun 21, 2020 12:20:37 GMT
Yeah, I think this thread should be defunct now. It's cool and nice and all to have a Leo and Denzel thread every once in a while, and it appears I've gained some valuable insight from this thread, but let's wait a month before discussing them again. Should be evidenced enough how a thread with those 2 will turn out based on prior history, but apparently............ history doesn't lie.
|
|
|
Post by DaleCooper on Jun 21, 2020 12:32:49 GMT
That this is even an argument is kind of ridiculous. The whole "since my friends talked more about Denzel than Leo it means he was bigger" is such a weak non-argument. It's like me saying because me and my friends talk much more about Chelsea Wolfe than some random stupidly huge pop star, she is now somehow a more well known artist than Ed Sheeran (I know this is an exaggeration, but the point is clear). The fact of the matter is that Leo was top billed in the most attended initial release in cinematic history. You do not have to argue one way or another, it's common sense that he was a huge movie star from then on. Just because it was mostly women who liked him (and varied amongst age groups), doesn't make it any less true. These days the fact that he can headline a 3 hour long movie about him going through the wilderness to gross half a billion is a testament to how incerdibly popular he is (again the argument that it *only* made 180 million in the US is nonsensical at best since that is a huge number and, you know, it's what the ratio between OS and DOM box office should look like).
As far as the thread goes, Leo and Denzel are pretty much my two favorite working actors. I think perhaps Denzel has higher highs, but Leo's got the consistency and filmography. Today I chose Leo, tomorrow it might have been Denzel.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,715
Likes: 2,293
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jun 21, 2020 12:44:34 GMT
That this is even an argument is kind of ridiculous. The whole "since my friends taled more about Denzel than Leo it means he was bigger" is such a weak non-argument. It's like me saying because me and my friends talk much more about Chelsea Wolfe than some random stupidly huge pop star, she is now somehow a more well known artist than Ed Sheeran (I know this is an exaggeration, but the point is clear). The fact of the matter is that Leo was top billed in the most attended initial release in cinematic history. You do not have to argue one way or another, it's common sense that he was a huge movie star from then on. Just because it was mostly women who liked him (and varied amongst age groups), doesn't make it any less true. These days the fact that he can headline a 3 hour long movie about him going through the wilderness to gross half a billion is a testament to how incerdibly popular he is (again the argument that it *only* made 180 million in the US is nonsensical at best since that is a huge number and, you know, it's what the ratio between OS and DOM box office should look like).
As far as the thread goes, Leo and Denzel are pretty much my two favorite working actors. I think perhaps Denzel has higher highs, but Leo's got the consistency and filmography. Today I chose Leo, tomorrow it might have been Denzel.
Don't you think people older than 14 in 1998 can have the option to ignore him? I ignored him because I'm not interested in some sappy films from the late 90s. Ok yeah, I guess that means he was popular, but Denzel in 1998 absolutely destroyed him. And in 2001 the gap widened even more. All I'm trying to say is that. Of course the dude was popular, he always has been but not over Denzel. What the hell are you arguing about now? You even said "it was mostly women" LOL. And you've not followed the 180 million thing closely enough, because you'll realize that I was talking about the relative percentage it made in the U.S. compared to the entire globe. And maybe it is what it should be ideally, but far from every film inherently has the ability to put up numbers like that.
|
|
|
Post by DaleCooper on Jun 21, 2020 13:55:16 GMT
Don't think people older than 14 in 1998 can have the option to ignore him? I ignored him because I'm not interested in some sappy films from the late 90s. Ok yeah, I guess that means he was popular, but Denzel in 1998 absolutely destroyed him. And in 2001 the gap widened even more. All I'm trying to say is that. Of course the dude was popular, he always has been but not over Denzel. What the hell are you arguing about now? You even said "it was mostly women" LOL. And you've not followed the 180 million thing closely enough, because you'll realize that I was talking about the relative percentage it made in the U.S. compared to the entire globe. And maybe it is what it should be ideally, but far from every film inherently has the ability to put up numbers like that. I don't even know what you're arguing here. Yes, of course people have the option to ignore him, anyone can ignore him to any degree they seem fit. However, there are countless number of examples of pop cultural phenomenas that while clearly disliked among certain demographics has been insanely popular amongst other demographics. If the argument was whether Denzel was more popular and reveered amongst movie going circles (and by that I mean movie buffs) the answer would obviously have been yes (and probably to this day so), but if we're discussing overall popularity that's a completely different thing.
Again, I don't know what you're getting at in the second paragraph. Yes, he was mainly popular among women back then. However, being insanely popular amongst some demographics still makes you more popular than being moderately popular amongst more demographics. And yes, it's true that some movies doesn't really have the ability to make that much money OS, but a lot of Denzel's movies in the past 10+ years absolutely could have if he was more popular (unless you're suggesting that action flicks cannot make money overseas).
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Jun 21, 2020 17:19:04 GMT
The Harris Poll however....oh, I loves that shit. Real world, relevant, broad demographic polled etc. The real deal.LOL! LOL, nobody gives a shit about that poll, as evidenced by the fact that you're the only one that even brings it up. And it's clear why you do, because Washington in the real world can't even get enough people to watch his movies so they make $300M worldwide The reason for my ban there had nothing to do with my posts on there or DiCaprio. It had to do with what I did 6 years ago. You'd be happy to know that it took me a whole 5 minutes to create another account and get back to posting again. I think ol' Matt forgot how ineffective forum bans are on me But speaking of other forums, are we forgetting that you are called the "Crazy Denzel guy" on an MMA forum for your desperate attempts to convince everybody that Washington is greater than Day-Lewis and also the laughing stock that you are on Goldderby for your insane meltdowns over Affleck beating Washington for the Oscar?
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 21, 2020 17:26:13 GMT
Dude, you just got Banned from AwardsWorthy for harrasment and excessive stanning of DiCaprio I've never been banned from anywhere. Go to sleep, bro. It's over.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Jun 21, 2020 17:29:58 GMT
It's not like I'm making this stuff up retrospectively. Nobody who reads my posts can possibly think I'm not American or not 35, but I never thought The Man in the Iron Mask made the money it did because of Leo. John Malkovich was a cooler dude to me in 1998, and I was in my teens. His psychotic villany in In the Line of Fire made a far greater impression in my mind, and I was sure if there was anything worth seeing about that Man in the Iron Mask movie, it was.... him. You should really give it up now, it's getting embarrassing. That you and your grandmother thought Malkovich was cooler doesn't make him the draw for the movie. And no, Poop Scrud having a hard-on for Washington and slobbering at DiCaprio for being more successful doesn't change that, either.
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Jun 21, 2020 18:30:08 GMT
Yeah, I think this thread should be defunct now. It's cool and nice and all to have a Leo and Denzel thread every once in a while, and it appears I've gained some valuable insight from this thread, but let's wait a month before discussing them again. Should be evidenced enough how a thread with those 2 will turn out based on prior history, but apparently............ history doesn't lie. I have thought of half jokingly suggesting that we just have a Denzel megathread because it seems like we have this discussion every week or so.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 21, 2020 18:37:46 GMT
Yeah, I think this thread should be defunct now. It's cool and nice and all to have a Leo and Denzel thread every once in a while, and it appears I've gained some valuable insight from this thread, but let's wait a month before discussing them again. Should be evidenced enough how a thread with those 2 will turn out based on prior history, but apparently............ history doesn't lie. I have thought of half jokingly suggesting that we just have a Denzel megathread because it seems like we have this discussion every week or so. It's hilarious, because I'm supposed to be one of the big Denzel Stans, but now I have to keep advocating that we should actually talk about him less, as it feels excessive This isn't so bad, as at least it's a relevant thread, but when some posters (who aren't even neccesarily Denzel fans, but love talking about him) keep randomly bringing him up in threads where he has no relevance in, it can be eye-roll worthy now.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Jun 21, 2020 18:45:42 GMT
Well, depends on the person. He knows how to act normal when he wants to, but when he zeros in on certain people he can behave like a typical troll.To me, he's not a good guy and that's why he just got banned from another forum. He got personal with people and worse. He's gotten personal with me, but I've just learned to disengage and move on. But he isn't helping the rep of Leo with this stuff, and if we had to take a wild guess who was responsible for dredging up those inactive accounts to take Leo from the bottom of this poll (poor Jeff Bridges, he had third place locked up ), look no further.... I'm glad you don't mind debating him though. The appeal definitely goes away when you have to deal with this dude for nearly a decade or whatever though, like myself. It's not like I'm making this stuff up retrospectively. Nobody who reads my posts can possibly think I'm not American or not 35, but I never thought The Man in the Iron Mask made the money it did because of Leo. John Malkovich was a cooler dude to me in 1998, and I was in my teens. His psychotic villany in In the Line of Fire made a far greater impression in my mind, and I was sure if there was anything worth seeing about that Man in the Iron Mask movie, it was.... him. You don't think The Man in the Iron Mask making the money it did while Titanic was still #1 in the box office was because of Leo? And instead it was because of... John Malkovich?
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 21, 2020 18:55:39 GMT
It's not like I'm making this stuff up retrospectively. Nobody who reads my posts can possibly think I'm not American or not 35, but I never thought The Man in the Iron Mask made the money it did because of Leo. John Malkovich was a cooler dude to me in 1998, and I was in my teens. His psychotic villany in In the Line of Fire made a far greater impression in my mind, and I was sure if there was anything worth seeing about that Man in the Iron Mask movie, it was.... him. You don't think The Man in the Iron Mask making the money it did while Titanic was still #1 in the box office was because of Leo? And instead it was because of... John Malkovich? DiCaprio would certainly have helped at that point in adding to it's appeal, but c'mon....the star of that shit was Alexandre Dumas.
Hollywood has been pumping out Three Musketeers films on a regular basis since damn near the beginning of the industry. I've lost count how many films have been made with those characters. That shit is tried and tested and practically a franchise, regardless of studio. There is a new variation of the adventures of these characters every couple of years, and Hollywood keeps making them because they are free intellectual property that everyone recognises and they make money.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Jun 21, 2020 19:06:57 GMT
Damn, what happened. LMAO. Leo fans said, not today.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 21, 2020 19:21:40 GMT
Damn, what happened. LMAO. Leo fans said, not today. You're funny.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Jun 21, 2020 21:44:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 21, 2020 21:57:42 GMT
Finally something f'n funny (besides my posts ) in this idiot wind thread......... btw on a different note - Jamie Foxx is trying something really odd unless I heard this wrong - I know he's playing Mike Tyson and he's over 50 - is he playing the young Mike Tyson or the over 50 Mike Tyson....? That's kind of fascinating if he's playing him younger and I saw him on TV talking about how he was working out and stuff - so is he going to have fight scenes at 50+?
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Jun 21, 2020 22:01:32 GMT
Finally something f'n funny (besides my posts ) in this idiot wind thread......... btw on a different note - Jamie Foxx is trying something really odd unless I heard this wrong - I know he's playing Mike Tyson and he's over 50 - is he playing the young Mike Tyson or the over 50 Mike Tyson....? That's kind of fascinating if he's playing him younger and I saw him on TV talking about how he was working out and stuff - so is he going to have fight scenes at 50+? Assuming what he said 5 years ago (back when Scorsese was attached to the project) is accurate, he's playing Tyson both old and young using de-aging tech.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,715
Likes: 2,293
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jun 21, 2020 22:08:07 GMT
It's not like I'm making this stuff up retrospectively. Nobody who reads my posts can possibly think I'm not American or not 35, but I never thought The Man in the Iron Mask made the money it did because of Leo. John Malkovich was a cooler dude to me in 1998, and I was in my teens. His psychotic villany in In the Line of Fire made a far greater impression in my mind, and I was sure if there was anything worth seeing about that Man in the Iron Mask movie, it was.... him. You don't think The Man in the Iron Mask making the money it did while Titanic was still #1 in the box office was because of Leo? And instead it was because of... John Malkovich? The Man in the Iron Mask was a blockbuster. It's not hard to see why it would make money. No, NOT because of Malkovich. I just meant I personally cared about him more in 1998 (not that it impacts anything with the wider demographic tho), but obviously he doesn't have the mass quantities of women and young girls behind him.
|
|
|
Post by tastytomatoes on Jun 26, 2020 16:46:39 GMT
|
|