Whatever, you hippies. I'm voting for Romney.
Huh, I'd figure you for a Ron Paul guy.
I did read Paul's book. I like him a lot but I'm a Democrat. I did vote for Ross Perot back in 1992.And of course I din't vote for that Android Romney.
Or Kucinich...you totally seem like you'd be into Kucinich.
Ummm, except Kucinich isn't in the race anymore?Voters who value experience and a plan in their candidates know that it's all about Hillary.
I KNOW that Kucinich isn't in it anymore, but wouldn't you think he would be Dan's guy?Ha ha, when I was chatting with Gabriel earlier, I said to him, "JR's a Hillary girl...I just KNOW it!"
Yeah, but I'll probably jump ship when Bloomberg decides to run in March.
I can't say I'm passionate about any of the Candidates. I liked Kucinich's ideas, but not so much for a president. I like Hillary the best.I really was a Perot man - he really wanted change.
I attended a Kucinich event (because it was held at my place of business and I had to take pictures), and sorta half listened...he had lots of great points (America is no longer optimistic, etc.), but didn't seem to actually have a plan. I could be thinking that because I wasn't listening closely, but I don't think that's the reason.That said, I had friends who voted for him in our primary (before he dropped out), and I was shocked to learn that. What a vote waster.I'll be really interested to see if Bloomberg joins the race, not only because I find him intriguing (and sexy!), but I find the concept of a candidate entering the race this far along intriguing, as well.
JR, anybody that touts a Perez Hilton endorsement loses the battle immediately. It's kinda like bringing up Nazi comparisons (which, your candidate's surrogates have done as well, incidentally).Sorry, dear. Next.
Ha! I lured Gabriel out of hiding.I rule.I only used the PerezHilton thing because it was such a good picture of Hill. I mean, really, anyone could have linked up hillaryclinton.com with their eyes closed.
Barack Obama has issued a comprehensive statement in support of arts and arts education in the US. His campaign position focuses on 9 points: Reinvesting in arts education, expanding public grants for arts ed, publicly championing arts ed, creating an artist corps, increasing funding for the National Endowment for the Arts, promoting cultural diplomacy, providing health care for artists and ensuring tax fairness for artists. Sure, its only words and promises at this stage. And, a quick check of Obama's website reveals that arts and culture do not appear in his master list of campaign issues, a drop-down list from the website's navigation bar. Still, it's good to see that the arts and cultural policy are at least on the agenda, and also to see a front-running candidate campaigning for increased funding and support for arts education and artists. This should be part of the national debate.
CLOVERFIELD - WORST FILM OF 2008. RIP-OFF OF 9/11. WHY DO STUDIOS GIVE MONEY FOR THIS SHIT? AMAZING.
Why do they give them money?Because Cloverfield KILLED at the Box Office. It cost $25 Million and has, to date, grossed $110 million worldwide. It will be a monster rental DVD bringing in massive DVD sales as well. Other than Juno, it has, compared to its budget) grossed more money than any other movie in the top 10. When it is all said and done the real money makers released in the last 3 months will be the Hannah Montana 3D flick, Alvin and the Chipmunks and Cloverfield.So, if you ae asking why I say it is because it made ungodly amounts of money and is a massive success.It's a "monster" hit.They are doing something right, hell, didn't Maise see it?
I'm not trying to be snarky here either. It's just the reality of that business.There Will Be Blood, a fine movie with a GREAT performace from Daniel Day Lewis will probably struggle to make money back unless it cleans up at the Oscars and gets a boost at the box office.
No Maise didn't see it. She wouldn't have been able to handle the nausea cam. But how about you focus on the brilliant point Anonymous had that Cloverfield is nothing more than a 9/11 ripoff. It's so genius. We create a mutant monster with our own waste similar to us funding Osama in the 80s along with the Saudis for our own purposes and then blowing him off after we got what we needed. Then the mutant reigns terror on NYC which is parallel to when Osama orchestrated the attacks the World Trade Center. There are even smaller parasite monsters that fall off the big guy (smaller terrorist cells if you will) that pick people off one or two at a time like what's happening in Iraq and other places right now. Yeah! I can totally see how this is a ripoff of 9/11. Ooh ooh! AND the building that they have to go rescue SUPER GIRLFRIEND out of is one of two towers that have been attacked! JUST LIKE THE WORLD TRADE CENTER! Ohz-My-Godz!Anonymous, if you really want to be upset at the Hollywood machine for profiting on the Sept 11th attacks why don't you go after actual movies about the events. Like World Trade Center which starred Nicolas Cage for Christ-sakes. What's the matter Oliver Stone? Couldn't find a bigger douchebag to cast as the lead? Was Tom Cruise busy?Oh and to bring this thread back around to politics (kind of)...am I the only one seeing a strange resemblance between Hilary Clinton and Steven Cojocaru from Entertainment Tonight? I think it's the chin, cheeks, and hair color. Oh and one other thing. Proof that God hates Hilary.
Blood will never be a money maker--even if it does well at the Oscars, I don't think they'd pay to make enough additional copies of the prints to get it on enough screens to make it worthwhile. 'Specially since they just bumped it up--twice--from 700 screens to 1000 screens to 1600 screens this weekend.Watch for it to be on DVD superquick, though.(Blood did an average of $1200+ per screen this weekend--so far--by comparison, Hannah Montana has done $6500+ per screen this weekend--but Hannah's only on 700 screens.)
But seriously, folks: new stuff at JR, TWO posts, in fact. Complaining AND pining! A twofer!
OK, I'm officially obsessed with Black Metal... a more extreme version of music can not be found.
What does that even mean, a "more extreme" version of music?
He means it blisters your ears listening to it. That it has the potential to actually shred your ear drum to bits. You know. EXTREME!
It's the whole package... the music is totally inaccessible unless you really let it grow on you, the "corpse-paint" make up, the murder, the suicides, the church burning, the Nordic god-worship. It's all this crazy mix of insane elements.
Know what I'm liking right now, which does not bow to cliche? (Or at least didn't when it was originally recorded.)Pixies.Yeah.
Danny - You are a little behind the time regarding Black Metal. That was so yesterday. NIN music has been called extreme (and brutal).
Saying I'm behind the times is like saying the grass is green.Black Metal is very '93-'95 but I never really listened 'til now.BUT...No one has ever called NIN music extreme or brutal. My grandma listens to NIN. And liking NIN is so behind the times anyway. I'm going to start being ahead of the times. I am going to like bands that haven't formed yet. And I will only listen to bands so extreme they will cause the extinction of mankind.
Such a band that has not formed yet AND will bring about the extinction of mankind will no doubt involve Nicole Richie and Joel Madden's child and...maybe Gwen Stefani's kid?
Let's leave the adorable Kingston out of this. I'm sure he'll end up in either the music or fashion world but I'm sure he'll go for the opposite of his folks and have a conservative indy clothing line or something.If you're looking for music acts to bring on man's extinction then you can't overlook Britney's kids. Can't you just picture them having some kind of electro- pop/grindcore/screamer group complete with dualing banjos (a shout-out to their mom's southern roots)? I think I hear the extinction coming
Post a Comment