|
i have goon face blindness and get zooey deschannel and lizzy caplan confused
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2023 20:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 01:41 |
|
|
Xaris posted:drat, it's over already?? that was fast 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2023 20:43
|
|
|
CPFortest posted:it's by the Game Night guys poo poo that's all you had to say
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2023 21:05
|
|
|
finally watched Verhoeven's Black Book today. good movie, just don't watch the second half while you're eating e: also found a deal for Starz $2/mo for 3 mos., solid offer ee: rip ray liotta 
Fleetwood has issued a correction as of 22:41 on Mar 31, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2023 22:10
|
|
|
who will be brave enough to release the first two-episode season
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2023 23:16
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:who will be brave enough to release the first two-episode season how about one-episode seasons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heil_Honey_I%27m_Home!
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2023 23:21
|
|
|
Xaris posted:how about one-episode seasons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heil_Honey_I%27m_Home! i preferred that's my bush anyway
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2023 23:22
|
|
|
Cuttlefush posted:i preferred that's my bush anyway lol that poo poo got canceled immediately after 9/11
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 00:18
|
|
|
Zeroisanumber posted:lol that poo poo got canceled immediately after 9/11 lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 00:41
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqrhaweKzio
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 00:48
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:it's insane how good the reviews for this are. gonna guilty pleasure watch this for sure it has puppets and stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 01:05
|
|
|
Tankbuster posted:it has puppets and stuff. even better. the cam rip looks like dogshit though
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 01:09
|
|
|
there's a CBS True Lies tv show??? jesus christ
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 01:10
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Wario64/status/1641919935776694275 discuss.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 01:29
|
|
|
i just found out hello kitty has a pet cat named charmmy kitty so maybe I'll buy one of those instead
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 01:39
|
|
|
Dr. Killjoy posted:i just found out hello kitty has a pet cat named charmmy kitty so maybe I'll buy one of those instead you also just found out that Hello Kitty is not a cat https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/miranda/la-et-cam-hello-kitty-in-los-angeles-not-a-cat-20140826-column.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 01:49
|
|
|
War and Pieces posted:you also just found out that Hello Kitty is not a cat https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/miranda/la-et-cam-hello-kitty-in-los-angeles-not-a-cat-20140826-column.html Lies , safely locked behind a paywall
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 01:51
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Lies , safely locked behind a paywall quote:Hello Kitty is not a cat. soyfacing like crazy rn
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 01:56
|
|
|
She’s five apples tall and weighs as many as three of them, I always though that revisionism was bullshit! And plenty of cats have their own pet cat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 02:05
|
|
|
*Guy leering towards uncomfortably younger woman at a party*: “Did you know Hello kitty isn’t even a cat? She’s actually human!” perverted fact for perverts
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 02:10
|
|
|
Thats a bunch of psychotic babble by someone who is criminally insane
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 02:11
|
|
|
quote:"No one would mistake the Disney character for a human–but at the same time he's not quite a mouse. Just like Hello Kitty isn't a human, she's not quite a cat either."[47] Sanrio stated further, "Hello Kitty was done in the motif of a cat. It's going too far to say that Hello Kitty is not a cat."
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 02:12
|
|
|
The absolute determination that the Hello Kitty people have to keep it purely a piece of children's media in the face of adult cynicism and irony is endearing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 02:14
|
|
|
goofy isn't a dog, pluto is a dog
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 02:15
|
|
|
hello I lack the words to describe an anthropomorphized animal cartoon character, despite that being my literal job
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 02:15
|
|
|
I've never watched Hello Kitty, but I know Sanrio's "Ringing Bell" is really good https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQt8CqVPNC4
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 02:17
|
|
|
I, like the rest of humankind, am predisposed to dislike Gwyneth Paltrow. I don’t like that she’s one of Hollywood’s foremost beneficiaries of nepotism. I don’t like that she essentially left acting to become a professional Gwyneth Paltrow instead. I don’t like her lifestyle brand, where you can plunk down $35 for a product earnestly named “Pure Delight Orgasm Balm.” I don’t like her ex-husband’s music. I still think it’s weird that she named her kid Apple. And I’m still bitter that “Shakespeare in Love” beat out “Saving Private Ryan” for best picture at the 1999 Oscars, even though a) I actually thought it was a very good movie (can’t go wrong with a Tom Stoppard screenplay!), b) Paltrow was excellent in it, and c) she had nothing to do with its victory over America’s Favorite Dad Movie. So when I tell you that I am 100% on Paltrow’s side in her legal wrangle with a retired optometrist — a man who went the full Sol Rosenberg and claims the actress ran his old rear end over on a ski slope at the Deer Valley resort in Park City, Utah, in 2016 — you can trust that I’m being sober in my assessment. It is EXTREMELY weird for a legal fight like this to end up in trial. Usually, the parties involved reach a settlement behind closed doors, sign 5,600 nondisclosure agreements and then walk away. No one wants to risk the exposure, both financial and personal, of a public trial. But this feud has gone the distance. They even allowed cameras into the courtroom for it, resulting in the kind of absurd moments I haven’t seen since the OJ Simpson trial was broadcast to the world nearly three decades ago. https://twitter.com/stevemorris__/status/1639390313683861506 That Paltrow was willing to put herself on the witness stand, and to spend way too much of her time hanging out in Utah to do so, should tell you just how irritating she finds her accuser — and how much she’d like to see his case left at the bottom of a ski lodge toilet. I don’t wanna ROOT for Gwyneth Paltrow to succeed in life any more than she already has, but goddamn if this case hasn’t made me an official, if only temporary, member of her street team. Let’s go through the particulars of this case — and God, they’re so f—king funny — because they’ll help you understand how I arrived at my ironclad judgment. Terry Sanderson is a 76-year-old retired optometrist (I don’t trust optometrists; they’re not real medical doctors) who is claiming that, back on that fateful day in 2016, Paltrow recklessly skied into him from behind, causing him long-lasting brain damage. Given Sanderson’s determination to bring this suit to trial, I’d say that there IS brain damage evident, although I cannot say how that damage originated. Oh right, I forgot to mention that Sanderson was a stroke victim before this even happened. According to The Cut, Paltrow’s legal team had Dr. Steven Edgley of the University of Utah review Sanderson’s medical records and unearthed this bounty of relevant information: "Edgley said Sanderson 'had a number of brain conditions' before the crash occurred. 'He had a stroke' from 'which he lost his eyesight in his right eye. He had evidence of a microvascular disease in his brain. And probably most important, he had evidence of hydrocephalus,' neurological problems that all preceded the crash. In court, Paltrow’s team displayed a long list of medical complaints — knee injury, walking into walls, hearing problems, osteoarthritis, and limited field of vision, to name just a few — that Sanderson brought to his doctors before the collision, all of which, the lawyers suggested, may have been contributing factors." Like Sanderson, I am also a stroke victim. Sanderson lost the use of his right eye from his stroke; I lost the use of my right ear. I also had trouble keeping my balance, managing my temper and keeping my vision in alignment. Again, I got all these problems from a stroke. I did not get them from having Pepper Potts give me a love tap on my way to the rope tow. If Sanderson’s health problems are real, I think I can properly assess the culprit here. Oh, and Sanderson also apparently acquired multiple personality disorder from this accident, too. When Paltrow’s lawyer pointed out discrepancies in his deposition and his eventual testimony — including getting his own height and weight wrong — Sanderson said that he was literally not himself while he was on the stand. “It’s not me, it’s the other personality which is inhabiting my body right now.” Watch the footage for yourself. https://twitter.com/theshamingofjay/status/1640508667467374593 Sanderson says that he was leisurely making his way down the mountain when screaming banshee Paltrow slammed into him from behind (Utah law, and general decorum, mandates that skiers uphill must yield to the skiers below them). Then she took off with her family, not even bothering to make sure that he was all right. “I got hit in my back so hard and right at my shoulder blades and it felt like it was perfectly centered and the fists and the poles were right at the bottom of my shoulder blades, serious, serious smack and I’ve never been hit that hard,” Sanderson said, per CNN. “All I saw was a whole lot of snow.” A ski patrol member called by Paltrow’s team would later testify that Sanderson passed all of his initial cognition tests and that there was no evidence that the collision had ever knocked him unconscious. No matter. Paltrow is clearly a black widow of the mountaintops and must answer for her transgressions. That’s why Sanderson originally sued her for over $3 million and included both the resort and two of its employees in his lawsuit. A district court judge then threw out Sanderson’s claim of emotional distress and dropped both the resort and the two employees from the case, according to Insider. Sanderson, ironically, would continue plowing blindly ahead regardless. He is now suing Paltrow for $300,000. A Paltr…y amount, if you ask me. HIGH-FIVE! Paltrow — countersuing Sanderson for a single, symbolic dollar — testified that Sanderson ran into her and not the other way around. According to the actress/New Age industrialist, Sanderson came up right behind her at an unreasonable speed, splitting her legs with his own skis before taking her down from behind. Awkward. For a split second, Paltrow thought someone might be pranking her, or even perhaps “doing something perverted,” only to quickly realize that no, no, this was just some clumsy old rear end in a top hat: https://twitter.com/BBCWorld/status/1639561947602628608 I enjoy this version of he-said-she-said WAY more than the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard trial. This is a FUN celebrity trial, and I’m grateful for it. Paltrow showed up to the courthouse wearing glasses that made her look like a 1980s police sketch. And that’s only the beginning of the sumptuous visuals that this proceeding has given the world. There was Paltrow’s lawyer waving around the fabled dollar to a surely enraptured jury — the kind of stunt that always plays out better on a Shonda Rhimes show than it does in real life. There was already legendary Sanderson counsel Kristin VanOrman, who I’m not certain even went to law school, buttering up Paltrow with small talk before trying (and failing) to nail her on the stand. https://twitter.com/stevemorris__/status/1639379049859497987 There was, I s—t you not, an animated re-creation of the accident that Paltrow’s defense team had made. These visuals not only help illustrate an incident that was not caught on video (and had only one extremely dubious eyewitness) but are 50 times better than the visual effects in “Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania." Makes the Zapruder film look like amateur hour. There was also this drawing, which offered even more visual context for the jury: https://twitter.com/vulture/status/1640744426942214144 And this account of the collision’s aftermath, from the deposition of Apple Martin, now 18 years old: “I noticed she looked a bit shocked, and I asked what had happened, and she said, 'This A-hole ran into me. He ran right into my back.'” Paltrow herself says she told Sanderson, “You skied directly into my f—king back,” after he allegedly skied into her, and then she apologized to the jury for using such foul language. I don’t know why her saying sorry for this kills me, but it does. And then, finally, there was this guy’s hair. https://twitter.com/bmullahy2news/status/1638658591690469376 It does appear that Sanderson’s ability to enjoy a fine syrah with a bite of manchego has been forever compromised. “Terry had been a high-functioning, active person,” Dr. Wendell Gibby testified. “Every day he was doing lots of things. Meeting groups, wine tasting, skiing, volunteering. After the accident, he deteriorated abruptly and many of the activities he loved to do, he stopped doing.” Can’t believe an old, half-blind man can’t do many of the things that he used to. JOHN DOE WAS RIGHT TO PUT YOUR PRETTY HEAD IN A BOX, GWYNETH! I am extremely sick of gray-area news stories, where I have to muddle through all of the nuances and all of the differing points of view from sympathetic parties. God, that gets so tiring to process. So I’m grateful that I don’t have to process this one. Paltrow is innocent. Her legal team even brought in a physics guy to explain how she couldn’t have done what Sanderson is claiming she did to him, and I am a Science Respecter. More to the point, I don’t CARE if Paltrow actually did it. I don’t care if she broke this rear end in a top hat’s ribcage. S—t happens. Also, Sanderson is annoying and probably deserved it anyway. In fact, I wish she’d beaten even MORE alternate personalities into him. I wish she’d dropped onto him from the chairlift, like Randy Savage off the top rope, and then treated herself to a jar of Pure Delight Orgasm Balm afterward to celebrate. This could be the start of a whole new, vengeful anti-heroine phase of Paltrow’s existence. And you know what? I’m down with it. Take this eye quack to the cleaners, girl. Get your dollar, and then stuff it down his throat. Some Guy TT has issued a correction as of 04:25 on Apr 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 04:22
|
|
|
remember the house fire pussy candles?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 04:28
|
|
|
Augus posted:goofy isn't a dog, pluto is a dog goofy is a fuckin dog dude
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 04:51
|
|
|
The confusion about who ran into whom, is because their souls switched bodies upon impact.Cuttlefush posted:goofy is a fuckin dog dude
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 04:53
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:he's a canid, like humans are hominids yeah
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 04:56
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:That Paltrow was willing to put herself on the witness stand, and to spend way too much of her time hanging out in Utah to do so, should tell you just how irritating But Gwyneth Paltrow finds everything irritating
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 05:47
|
|
|
Cuttlefush posted:goofy is a fuckin dog dude Goofy is not a dog. He’s a cartoon character. He's a grown man. He is a friend. But he is not a dog. all people who sue rich celebrities known for their roles in marvel movies should automatically get paid imo Augus has issued a correction as of 05:56 on Apr 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 05:53
|
|
|
Clip-On Fedora posted:But Gwyneth Paltrow finds everything irritating not a good endorsement for her pussy eggs
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 06:02
|
|
|
Augus posted:all people who sue rich celebrities known for their roles in marvel movies should automatically get paid imo funny to think gwyneth paltrow used to be famous for actual movie roles before just going eh gently caress it once the marvel cinematic universe started to take off
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 06:27
|
|
|
If Goofy isn't a dog, then I suppose Donald isn't a duck either?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 08:54
|
|
|
Micky Mouse, Donald Duck, Bugs Bunny and... Goofy Dog? no. because goofy is not a dog
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 09:02
|
|
|
he's a dog
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 09:04
|
|
|
maybe used to be a cow
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 09:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 01:41 |
|
|
Durf posted:i so that's why The Aviator looked like a teal nightmare no this teal is for a different reason. Before they could pack 3 film strips into a camera they were able to pack 2 and the orange/teal (actually magenta-teal here) thing was still the most natural. black and white film with color filters that were used to mask dye in the print. this movie emulated that.  stills photography just had hosed up colors for a long time but it was color negative, not this black and white poo poo Antonymous has issued a correction as of 09:08 on Apr 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 09:06
|
|