1. This post has been removed.

  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: ARGO

    In response to notin's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:


    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:


    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:


    In response to nhsteven's comment:


    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:


    FTR, Steven, weren't there people who tried to pretend that the Holocaust didn't happen? I would imagine you weren't as dismissive with that. Just pointing that out. You can't pretend things didn't happen, that did happen because whoever likes it better that way.


    I believe Ahmadinejad (Iran's President) is a fan of this concept, he apparently even had a Holocaust Denier convention; oh, and supposedly Mel Gibson's father; apparently they have a few things in common.



    Mel Gibson was supposedly raised in upstate, NY. Guess he's a Yankee fan. Just sayin'.



    Mel Gibson was born in Peekskill, NY. Downstate as far as I'm concerned.

    His family moved to Australia when he was 12.

    I have not seen Argo although I have read that the escape was largely fictional.

    There was none of the close calls, drama or suspense as portrayed in the film the people were allowed to leave untouched un-noticed by the Iranians.

    More involvement by the Canadians who were largely given credit for it at that time which I remember well.

    Seeing signs shortly after the escape all over upstate NY erected for Canadian tourists "Thank you Canada".

    Such is Hollywood, drama sells the hell with accuracy and history.

    Fiction wins Oscars.




    Well, let me just say, "Thank you, Canada". But the beef seems to be with Ben, and not with the writer.



    The award was for "Best Picture". Not "Best History Lesson."



    There is a reason they say these things are "BASED on a True Story" and not simply "A True Story. "

    Well put

  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from jete02fan. Show jete02fan's posts

    Re: ARGO

    In response to kimsaysthis's comment:


    In response to jete02fan's comment:


    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:


    In response to nhsteven's comment:


    Kim raved about this here. Good pick, Kim.


    Yes! So happy he won. Great night for a great Sox fan. To not even be nominated in the Best Director category couldn't change how great the film was. He was so emotional, it was a beautiful moment.


    Thanks for the thread celebrating this, Steven. It was really fun to see. One of my favorite Oscar ceremonies.


    Kim, i agree, he would have been absolutely deserving, but if anyone even moderately followed the awards season, Ang Lee was going to be a slam dunk winner..



    Ben wasn't even nominated, and he won the award at all the other ceremonies. No offense, Jete, but the only way Ang Lee would be a slam dunk, would be to leave Ben out of the category. JMO Not to take anthing away from Lee, but wasn't that sort of an animated movie? Ben was directing actual people, and a lot of the people in some of those scenes were just local people who weren't actors at all. Again, JMO, but he certainly should have been INCLUDED in the category.



    well, i disagree there, but it's how you feel..i totally respect that, otherwise, i'm in total agreement about his exclusion....the Academy did him a diservice, though we've seen numerous Oscar gaffes over the years, they can now add this one...


  4. This post has been removed.

  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: ARGO

    In response to softlaw2's comment:


    Or rather, you responded incorrectly by saying I didn't comment on the subject matter. 

    You didn't comment on the subject matter, you immediately went to invective and a cataonic diatribe that had nothing to do with the subject. 

    The subject was dealing with your treatment of Afleck and what he should do with his money

    No, the subject matter was not "my treatment of A-Fleck". Your emotional invective and meaningless "judgment" comment isn't the subject. My comment wasn't "what he should do with his money", it was that he needs to do as he says, not as he does.   

    As you lawyers would say, you introduced the "evidence" or the subject, thereby making it germain.   The subject of hypocrisy you didn't miss.  Seems to have stung you.  That was the point.


     evidence. "Germane" has nothing to do with evidence admissibility. 

    Try not to play like a bully. 

     This from a poster who opens with "maniacal" and then pontificates about "judgmental". The bully is you, and the censors who are trolling along with you.






         This was fun.   Try again.  

         Very proud of you catching the homonyms and typos.  You aren't a complete maroon after all.

         But you still are wrong.  You brought up the subject I responded to.  The onus is on you.

         Give it another try. 

         Look up diversion while you are at it.  You use it all the time, but don't allow others to us it.  You go off subject and interject all manner of inflammatory stuff ... and think we should sit here and take it. 

          Typical bully.



    Oh ... just in case you wondered were wondering, I was laughing at you, not with you.*



      *See, I can correct my grammar as well as my spelling.   Not hard.  Easy, like you.

  6. This post has been removed.

  7. This post has been removed.

  8. This post has been removed.