|
Post by Joaquim on Nov 28, 2017 21:01:29 GMT
Neither Reddit nor Redditors themselves are to be taken seriously, ESPECIALLY when it comes to conspiracy theories. Hey now, what's with this redditor prejudice? 4chan weaponized autism > reddit
|
|
|
Post by Lord_Buscemi on Nov 28, 2017 21:09:34 GMT
Neither Reddit nor Redditors themselves are to be taken seriously, ESPECIALLY when it comes to conspiracy theories. Hey now, what's with this redditor prejudice? I use 4chan, so I'm born to hate it. Reddit is shit, into the trash it goes.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Nov 28, 2017 21:40:29 GMT
There is not enough popcorn on earth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2017 21:17:40 GMT
Just because MacFarlane managed to make references to open secrets about Weinstein and Spacey doesn't mean every joke should be analyzed as "insider info." Roger dressed up like Spielberg because a.) Spielberg is one of the most recognizable directors in Hollywood on sight, b.) it was parodying the '80s coming-of-age kid adventure movies that he pioneered, and c.) because Roger is a sexual deviant. Roger dressing up like Spielberg shouldn't be taken as "Roger is dressing up as a predator." The joke is perverting the image of Spielberg as a family-friendly director of the era. As for these Spielberg-tangential blind items, I would take them with the largest grain of salt possible. For every blind item that turns out to be true, there's a dozen that are horseshit, and Spielberg is perhaps the most powerful figure in the industry, so of course people will be trying to come up with shit that can be attached to him. What do you mean “largest” grain of salt?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2017 21:51:13 GMT
Just because MacFarlane managed to make references to open secrets about Weinstein and Spacey doesn't mean every joke should be analyzed as "insider info." Roger dressed up like Spielberg because a.) Spielberg is one of the most recognizable directors in Hollywood on sight, b.) it was parodying the '80s coming-of-age kid adventure movies that he pioneered, and c.) because Roger is a sexual deviant. Roger dressing up like Spielberg shouldn't be taken as "Roger is dressing up as a predator." The joke is perverting the image of Spielberg as a family-friendly director of the era. As for these Spielberg-tangential blind items, I would take them with the largest grain of salt possible. For every blind item that turns out to be true, there's a dozen that are horseshit, and Spielberg is perhaps the most powerful figure in the industry, so of course people will be trying to come up with shit that can be attached to him. What do you mean “largest” grain of salt? Don't take it seriously
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2017 22:06:13 GMT
What do you mean “largest” grain of salt? Don't take it seriously But why the word “largest”?
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Nov 29, 2017 22:07:17 GMT
But why the word “largest”? Because the larger the grain, the more the claim should be taken with skepticism.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 15:47:28 GMT
Just because MacFarlane managed to make references to open secrets about Weinstein and Spacey doesn't mean every joke should be analyzed as "insider info." Roger dressed up like Spielberg because a.) Spielberg is one of the most recognizable directors in Hollywood on sight, b.) it was parodying the '80s coming-of-age kid adventure movies that he pioneered, and c.) because Roger is a sexual deviant. Roger dressing up like Spielberg shouldn't be taken as "Roger is dressing up as a predator." The joke is perverting the image of Spielberg as a family-friendly director of the era. As for these Spielberg-tangential blind items, I would take them with the largest grain of salt possible. For every blind item that turns out to be true, there's a dozen that are horseshit, and Spielberg is perhaps the most powerful figure in the industry, so of course people will be trying to come up with shit that can be attached to him. There's another thing. MovieWeb posted this in regard to Corey Feldman:
"It's surprising at this poit that Steven Spielberg, who had a strong working relationship with Feldman when he was around the age of first experiencing abuse, has not said anything. Goonies director Richard Donner has also stayed quite, though it's known he has a relationship with accused sex offender, X-Men director Bryan Singer. So there is definitely something going on behind the scenes. Which we may learn more about in Corey Feldman's Truth movie."
movieweb.com/corey-feldman-truth-campaign-movie-new-video-hollywood-pedophiles/
I remember reading that Feldman credited both Spielberg and Donner as trusted friends, but still...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 20:55:42 GMT
...?
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Nov 30, 2017 21:00:22 GMT
Do you really have nothing better to occupy your mind with?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 21:01:19 GMT
Well... that MovieWeb article came out just yesterday...
|
|
|
Post by Joaquim on Nov 30, 2017 21:44:21 GMT
Do you really have nothing better to occupy your mind with? It's either this or asking what the budget of a blockbuster film is or asking what its aspect ratio is with this guy. Pick your poison.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2017 13:38:44 GMT
But why the word “largest”? Because the larger the grain, the more the claim should be taken with skepticism. Well... in any case, have you checked that MovieWeb article that I posted here recently?
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Dec 1, 2017 15:25:38 GMT
Because the larger the grain, the more the claim should be taken with skepticism. Well... in any case, have you checked that MovieWeb article that I posted here recently? The article says nothing, it's just speculating.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2017 15:51:40 GMT
Well... in any case, have you checked that MovieWeb article that I posted here recently? The article says nothing, it's just speculating. You've read the part that I quoted, right?
How would you interpret that part?
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Dec 1, 2017 15:54:58 GMT
The article says nothing, it's just speculating. You've read the part that I quoted, right?
How would you interpret that part?
What you quoted is someone else's speculation. They think that because Spielberg hasn't publicly sided with Feldman and that Donner hasn't publicly repudiated Singer, that means they are protecting abusers or culpable in some way. It could be that they don't have anything public to say because there's nothing to say.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2017 16:14:34 GMT
You've read the part that I quoted, right?
How would you interpret that part?
What you quoted is someone else's speculation. They think that because Spielberg hasn't publicly sided with Feldman and that Donner hasn't publicly repudiated Singer, that means they are protecting abusers or culpable in some way. It could be that they don't have anything public to say because there's nothing to say. Which is strange because as far as I'm remember, Feldman seems to have nothing against either of them...
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Dec 1, 2017 16:21:39 GMT
What you quoted is someone else's speculation. They think that because Spielberg hasn't publicly sided with Feldman and that Donner hasn't publicly repudiated Singer, that means they are protecting abusers or culpable in some way. It could be that they don't have anything public to say because there's nothing to say. Which is strange because as far as I'm remember, Feldman seems to have nothing against either of them... But the article mentions them only in relation to them not publicly backing Feldman. Who knows what they may have done privately? (Note: I don't mean "privately" in a salacious way; more that they might have spoken to him personally.) Spielberg's not been asked much about this as far as I know (he mentioned the Weinstein thing briefly on a red carpet some time ago, saying that he had opinions but they were best kept to himself and that it wasn't the time and place to vocalize them), and Donner's not really doing a whole lot these days that would necessitate people asking him much of anything of note, much less about his feelings on Feldman's situation. As for Donner's relationship with Singer, a lot of those claims are still unsubstantiated and if Donner considers Singer a friend, it might be hard for him to address such things if they turn out to be true. That doesn't mean Donner had anything to do with the abuse, but it shows that abuse can hurt people even indirectly. My point, though, is it isn't worth speculating on Spielberg or Donner's feelings on the matter of Corey Feldman, because rampant speculation clouds judgment and causes people to make decisions before any facts are in.
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on Dec 1, 2017 16:24:41 GMT
Now that I think about it, he's on to something.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2017 16:27:09 GMT
Now that I think about it, he's on to something. What do you mean by that? And what does this picture mean?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2017 16:31:33 GMT
Which is strange because as far as I'm remember, Feldman seems to have nothing against either of them... But the article mentions them only in relation to them not publicly backing Feldman. Who knows what they may have done privately? (Note: I don't mean "privately" in a salacious way; more that they might have spoken to him personally.) Spielberg's not been asked much about this as far as I know (he mentioned the Weinstein thing briefly on a red carpet some time ago, saying that he had opinions but they were best kept to himself and that it wasn't the time and place to vocalize them), and Donner's not really doing a whole lot these days that would necessitate people asking him much of anything of note, much less about his feelings on Feldman's situation. As for Donner's relationship with Singer, a lot of those claims are still unsubstantiated and if Donner considers Singer a friend, it might be hard for him to address such things if they turn out to be true. That doesn't mean Donner had anything to do with the abuse, but it shows that abuse can hurt people even indirectly. My point, though, is it isn't worth speculating on Spielberg or Donner's feelings on the matter of Corey Feldman, because rampant speculation clouds judgment and causes people to make decisions before any facts are in. About Spielberg's comment on Weinstein... it didn't sound like Spielberg had that much positive opinions on Weinstein, did he?
I mean, I've been hearing that Spielberg is the godfather of Gwyneth Paltrow and Drew Barrymore, along with the fact that the closest time Spielberg worked with Weinstein was when the former was producing 'Memoirs of a Geisha'...
|
|
|
Post by Miles Morales on Dec 1, 2017 17:08:41 GMT
Stop. Panicking.
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on Dec 1, 2017 17:33:42 GMT
Now that I think about it, he's on to something. What do you mean by that? And what does this picture mean? It's from the long famed, yet only whispered, Hollywood society called the Black Hand where they help to keep things hush hush about the dark goings on in Tinseltown by squelching those who might speak out. It's not a nice group.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2017 17:38:09 GMT
Okay... does anyone know about this group that theycallmemrfish just mentioned?
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Dec 1, 2017 17:41:34 GMT
Okay... does anyone know about this group that theycallmemrfish just mentioned?
|
|