Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from S0ftl@w. Show S0ftl@w's posts

    Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    Feel free to move, censors. Thank you.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from bald-predictions. Show bald-predictions's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

     I suspect this will be a very loose, heavily fictionalized account of the book, trying to appeal to the female audience, and copying the formula from the Social Network movie. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from S0ftl@w. Show S0ftl@w's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    Yes, female audience is almost as easy to titiliate as the male and transgender and alternative lifestyle audience.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Your-Echo. Show Your-Echo's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    NONSENSE THREAD. WATCH A MOVIE HARNESS. YOUR FORUM STINKS.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    I often do while being amused by this nutcase Softliar.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    Have you seen it yet? Of course not since it has not been released yet. Sept 19 in Oakland.

    So if not released yet how can you make such a comment about bad acting? Or is this one of your 43% fastball "facts" that you fail to show a link to.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from stormcrow7878. Show stormcrow7878's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    In Response to Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?:
    [QUOTE]Yes, female audience is almost as easy to titiliate as the male and transgender and alternative lifestyle audience.
    Posted by S0ftl@w[/QUOTE]

    Is this some bigoted shot at the LGBT community Softy? I knew you hated Native Americans, I didn't know you were a despicable gay-basher as well.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from wherescreamingcomesfrom. Show wherescreamingcomesfrom's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    You think Brad Pitt is a bad actor? Are you a stupid or something? Have you seen "Burn After Reading", "Tree of Life"? Your not just an idiot when it comes to baseball, huh? Guess it extends to other areas . . .

    The stupid censorship software won't let me use the title of the film brad pitt was in directed by Guy Ritchie.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    In Response to Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?:
    [QUOTE]Have you seen it yet? Of course not since it has not been released yet. Sept 19 in Oakland. So if not released yet how can you make such a comment about bad acting? Or is this one of your 43% fastball "facts" that you fail to show a link to.
    Posted by JimfromFlorida[/QUOTE]

    Word is out and it will remain so. This is one more in a long line of Softliar fabrications he thinks we'll swallow as his "baseball acumen".
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from S0ftl@w. Show S0ftl@w's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    Have you seen it yet? Yes, I've seen Brad Pitiful, and he is a terrible actor.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from S0ftl@w. Show S0ftl@w's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    Is this some bigoted shot at the LGBT community Softy? I knew you hated Native Americans, I didn't know you were a despicable gay-basher as well.

    No, it's not bigoted. But your comment is. I have a cherokee ancestor.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    In Response to Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?:
    [QUOTE]Is this some bigoted shot at the LGBT community Softy? I knew you hated Native Americans, I didn't know you were a despicable gay-basher as well. No, it's not bigoted. But your comment is. I have a cherokee ancestor.
    Posted by S0ftl@w[/QUOTE]

    Did he/she have a reverse pivot tomahawk?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    I'm not questioning what you didn't use. I only want to you to reveal UR source so that comparable studies can take place. You ridicule other sources. Give me the same courtesy.

    And don't confuse taking a position with lying about it.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from stormcrow7878. Show stormcrow7878's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    In Response to Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?:
    [QUOTE]Is this some bigoted shot at the LGBT community Softy? I knew you hated Native Americans, I didn't know you were a despicable gay-basher as well. No, it's not bigoted. But your comment is. I have a cherokee ancestor.
    Posted by S0ftl@w[/QUOTE]

    You obviously don't understand the definition of bigotry.  Also, you didn't answer my question...are you a gay-bashing bigot? Of course you won't answer this question, cowards like you never do.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from stormcrow7878. Show stormcrow7878's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    "www.boston.com/community/persona.html?UID=ebb9d3d4fa1d5ceeb85c4236ed52f7ae&plckUserId=ebb9d3d4fa1d5ceeb85c4236ed52f7ae">
    Posts: 283
    First: 8/23/2011
    Last: 8/30/2011
    I understand it, but you don't. Are you a Christian bashing bigot? Of course you will claim that Gat is a physical identity and the Bible does not consider homosexual conduct a sin. Cowards always want censorship by calling dissent "hate" and "bashing" and "judging". Get over it. I don't hate you becuase of your sins and perverse behavior. I feel sorry for you and if"

    Why did you bring religion into the conversation? I never mentioned Christianity, and had no intentions to. Of course Christ never said anything about LGBT people, so using the Christian religion as a source for your hatred of LGBT people does not pass the smell test.  I have no idea what a "physical identity" is, but I do know that being gay is a genetic issue, and that it is present in every mammal, so it IS MOST CERTAINLY natural. As for cowardice...Softy you take the cake, you avoid any and all questions that show your ignorance, and now you are hiding behind a book that I KNOW I have studied more than you ever will. BUT YOU DO ENTERTAIN ME SOFTY....KEEP TROLLING, BECAUSE YOU MAKE ME LAUGH CHILD!!! YOU MAKE ME CHUCKLE!!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtics1986. Show Celtics1986's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    The preview looked pretty funny, if that is what they are going for.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxlaxer12. Show redsoxlaxer12's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    Have you read the book? Great stuff but without creative license there is NO WAY they could make a movie about it. Guarantee they mention bill James once in the movie if they mention him at all. Also paul depodesta isnt in it at all.. they make up a character who is a similar person. These things however do not make it automatically a bad Movie. Do they play up the underdog that the A's were and the surprise in their success??? Yes because in actuality in the 2000 and 2001 seasons the A's were a great team. But that makes for a better movie which hopefully will turn more people onto baseball......And then we all win

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    In Response to Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?:
    [QUOTE]I understand it, but you don't. Are you a Christian bashing bigot? Of course you will claim that Gat is a physical identity and the Bible does not consider homosexual conduct a sin. Cowards always want censorship by calling dissent "hate" and "bashing" and "judging". Get over it. I don't hate you becuase of your sins and perverse behavior. I feel sorry for you and if you have a flat tire I will help you.
    Posted by S0ftl@w[/QUOTE]

    Would you help Wake?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    In Response to Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?:
    [QUOTE]" www.boston.com/community/persona.html?UID=ebb9d3d4fa1d5ceeb85c4236ed52f7ae&plckUserId=ebb9d3d4fa1d5ceeb85c4236ed52f7ae " /> S0ftl@w Posts: 283 First: 8/23/2011 Last: 8/30/2011 I understand it, but you don't. Are you a Christian bashing bigot? Of course you will claim that Gat is a physical identity and the Bible does not consider homosexual conduct a sin. Cowards always want censorship by calling dissent "hate" and "bashing" and "judging". Get over it. I don't hate you becuase of your sins and perverse behavior. I feel sorry for you and if" Why did you bring religion into the conversation? I never mentioned Christianity, and had no intentions to. Of course Christ never said anything about LGBT people, so using the Christian religion as a source for your hatred of LGBT people does not pass the smell test.  I have no idea what a "physical identity" is, but I do know that being gay is a genetic issue, and that it is present in every mammal, so it IS MOST CERTAINLY natural. As for cowardice...Softy you take the cake, you avoid any and all questions that show your ignorance, and now you are hiding behind a book that I KNOW I have studied more than you ever will. BUT YOU DO ENTERTAIN ME SOFTY....KEEP TROLLING, BECAUSE YOU MAKE ME LAUGH CHILD!!! YOU MAKE ME CHUCKLE!!
    Posted by stormcrow7878[/QUOTE]


    Another truth.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from S0ftl@w. Show S0ftl@w's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

     Of course Christ never said anything about LGBT people, so using the Christian religion as a source for your hatred of LGBT people does not pass the smell test. I have no idea what a "physical identity" is, but I do know that being gay is a genetic issue, and that it is present in every mammal, so it IS MOST CERTAINLY natural

    Matthew 19:1-12 

    Using the Christian religion as a source for your claim that it is hatred to denounce homosexual behavior as a sin because of the specious claim that, despite this behavior being directly denounced in multiple Biblical passages, Christ never specifically called this behavior a sin, is bigotry.
     
    You do not know that same-sex sexual conduct orientation is genetic, not that genetics validate conduct. It most certainly isn't natural conduct, as natural human and animal life would cease if it was. 

    Most certainly, behavioral conduct is not a physical identity. It has become a physcial identity by artifice, in an attempt to validate a behavior to bring about legitmizing same-sex sexual behavior based relationships, first in the easier forum of the State, which makes it easier to change the moral institutions where the State derives it's moral codes, the religious sects that have denounced it since the beginning of mankind.

    In the same-sexual behavioral lobby attempt to use the equal protection clause to further specious claims for the merits of United States wide legitimacy, all men and women have equal protection under marriage laws (marriage being etymology defined as man and woman joined together as one). Equal protection only requires that each person be afforded equal protection of the laws. Any law that allows any man to marry a woman, and any woman to marry a man, is affording equal protection under the law. Of course, State Legislatures are the easier political forums to advance a societal change in values.  

    A more legitimate case for unfair discrimination can be made for polygamous relationships.

    At the end of the day, the United States used to reflect the morals of the Judeo-Christian-Deist (Deist founding fathers were all Judeo-Christian taught and belived in God, of course), but it now reflects the secular values of an increasingly hedonist (if it feels good and is consensual and doesn't hurt anyone else if I or we say it doesn't) society looking for ways to legitimize desired behaviors of personal pleasure. Despite protests to the contrary, the rejection of these morals is a terrible example for youth and has netted an increasingly destructive force on the families of my decadent generation. 

    Needless to say, while some American changes are welcomed as a force for good, despite a Constitution that still makes it the world leader in virtue, the contemporary United States is not an institution to study models of virtue.  

    America isn't on a slippery values slope, it is in a moral nose dive. Pandora's Box isn''t a fear based analogy, it is a reality.

    Bad Hollywood actors are a bad way to tell the story of Billy Beane and Baseball.

    Softlaw - c
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from tombirner. Show tombirner's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    Moneyball will be excellent. Aaron Sorkin is absolutely brilliant- the best writer in Hollywood right now... as usual, Softlaw, you don't know what you're talking about. Since when does the lead decide if a movie's good or not?

    There are others with more chops than Pitt (his vocal delivery is especially wooden), but his taste is excellent. In fact his presence in a film usually signifies high quality. Babel, Seven, Legends Of The Fall, Twelve Monkeys... all excellent (think Fight Club is overrated and Tree Of Life hasn't come out where I live quite yet).   

    Just because someone is famous doesn't mean he isn't talented.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from cglassanos. Show cglassanos's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    You know its a barn-burner of a thread when Jesus, God, the Bible, or John Madden is quoted.

    Haven't seen Madden yet... but I'm holding out.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Yoshimi25. Show Yoshimi25's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    Hmmm...I'll reserve judgement until after I see the movie.  In general, I've never had much faith in Hollywood to do anything right, but there have been times when I've been pleasantly surprised. 

    Then again, it could be the worst movie of the year and I'd still rather see it than any of that Twilight Saga (searching for word that would be acceptable to not only censors but to the more refined posters...) (...searching....) (...searching...)...(giving up)...garbage.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from frankn. Show frankn's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    What the hell was that by Softlaw?  Was this a movie review or a Tea Party?  I was just hoping Angelina Jolie was topless in the movie?:)
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Bratt Pitt and Moneyball? Why do they ruin true stories with Hollywood image bad actors?

    crapola works, Yoshi...
     

Share