also gervais has made it clear when not doing a bit that he 100% is happy for and even agrees with steve carell's decision to move on so it would be pretty ludicrous for carell to not be able to take a swipe about it
satansfingers on
0
Options
BusterKNegativity is Boring Cynicism is Cowardice Registered Userregular
The reactions to this are going to be interesting reads. Like I can't say I'd fault RDJ or Sheen for being a little upset, but at the same time this year's Golden Globes were the best they've been in years. Maybe the best awards shows have been in years.
babyeatingjesus on
0
Options
StraightziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered Userregular
i honestly would be surprised if anyone he insulted who was there in person was genuinely upset (maybe angelina jolie), especially RDJ who jokes about having been in prison with some regularity
i honestly would be surprised if anyone he insulted who was there in person was genuinely upset (maybe angelina jolie), especially RDJ who jokes about having been in prison with some regularity
I certainly hope he wasn't, but of course you never know, this article makes it seem like he was, but the whole thing reads like it's slightly biased in favour of inciting extra controversy (go figure).
And speaking backstage after the show, [Robert Downey Junior] added: 'I think it's great to be funny, but it's just better if you can do it without hurting people.'
Again, that's just from the one article I've read so far, which based on the title alone shows a pretty clear slant against Gervais, so I wouldn't be surprised either way, I guess.
babyeatingjesus on
0
Options
MustangArbiter of Unpopular OpinionsRegistered Userregular
Nobody who makes Tom Cruise jokes could ever survive in Hollywood, man
Especially jokes about him being gay, dude goes apeshit when people call him gay, probably because of his lifelong commitment and considerable financial investment to hiding his gayness.
i attempted to carefully exclude people not poking back at him/people not present, because yeah somehow i don't think charlie sheen or tom cruise or john travolta were happy with how it all went
I enjoyed the Globes more this year. I think I had better gags. More along the lines of the Mel Gibson one last year.
Obviously the rumour that the organizers stopped me going out on stage for an hour is rubbish. I did every link I was scheduled to do. The reason why the gaps were uneven is because when I got the rundown I was allowed to choose who I presented to. I obviously chose the spots that I had the best gags for. They couldn't move around the order but I could move around however I wanted.
All the same conspiracy theories as last year too... "So and so was offended"... "hasn't been invited back yet"... exactly the same as last time. "Paul McCartney was furious"... no he wasn't. And nor was Tim Allen and Tom Hanks. I was drinking with them after.
Why do people have to embellish? They're allowed to say they hated it. They're allowed to say they didn't find it funny, that it was tasteless, over the top, or whatever. But why do they speculate and make stuff up?
Don't worry, I know the answer. Because it's more interesting than "it went fine and some people won some awards and then went to a party". But that's all that happened.
Actually, I see what they mean. Boring. So here's what really happened. Bruce Willis and Sly Stallone started a fight with me but Alec Baldwin and Mark Walberg stepped in and helped me out. That's what happened.
I found it interesting in the Canadian Press article how the ratings for the Golden Globes were the top rated NBC prime time entertainment telecast among young adults since last year's golden globes.
That's a lot of caveats, it seems. How many such programs are there in a year? Still, 17 Million viewers doesn't seem so bad.
babyeatingjesus on
0
Options
BusterKNegativity is Boring Cynicism is Cowardice Registered Userregular
I enjoyed the Globes more this year. I think I had better gags. More along the lines of the Mel Gibson one last year.
Obviously the rumour that the organizers stopped me going out on stage for an hour is rubbish. I did every link I was scheduled to do. The reason why the gaps were uneven is because when I got the rundown I was allowed to choose who I presented to. I obviously chose the spots that I had the best gags for. They couldn't move around the order but I could move around however I wanted.
All the same conspiracy theories as last year too... "So and so was offended"... "hasn't been invited back yet"... exactly the same as last time. "Paul McCartney was furious"... no he wasn't. And nor was Tim Allen and Tom Hanks. I was drinking with them after.
Why do people have to embellish? They're allowed to say they hated it. They're allowed to say they didn't find it funny, that it was tasteless, over the top, or whatever. But why do they speculate and make stuff up?
Don't worry, I know the answer. Because it's more interesting than "it went fine and some people won some awards and then went to a party". But that's all that happened.
Actually, I see what they mean. Boring. So here's what really happened. Bruce Willis and Sly Stallone started a fight with me but Alec Baldwin and Mark Walberg stepped in and helped me out. That's what happened.
Man, I really want to drink with Tim Allen and Tom Hanks...
Posts
What spring does with the cherry trees.
I don't have a source
That's why I said I have heard, rather than citing it in the first place
As well as overusing the word apparently
the one thing in common with all the reviews (mostly negative btw)
they had a problem with it being 85 minutes
a film about a living tire that kills people
and people aren't pissed at how stupid awesome it is, they're pissed at how long it is
Steam
who was fucking high when they ok'd this
but then who did you hear it from
I don't know but I want to smoke with them
Nobody who makes Tom Cruise jokes could ever survive in Hollywood, man
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq4qlOCIdQc&feature=related
Amazon Wishlist: http://www.amazon.com/BusterK/wishlist/3JPEKJGX9G54I/ref=cm_wl_search_bin_1
My friend Donny
I certainly hope he wasn't, but of course you never know, this article makes it seem like he was, but the whole thing reads like it's slightly biased in favour of inciting extra controversy (go figure).
Again, that's just from the one article I've read so far, which based on the title alone shows a pretty clear slant against Gervais, so I wouldn't be surprised either way, I guess.
Especially jokes about him being gay, dude goes apeshit when people call him gay, probably because of his lifelong commitment and considerable financial investment to hiding his gayness.
Gervais' own blog is something I would like to trust.
Steam
It just makes you Roger Corman.
That's a lot of caveats, it seems. How many such programs are there in a year? Still, 17 Million viewers doesn't seem so bad.
Yeah but Roger Corman knew how to make some serious money
Amazon Wishlist: http://www.amazon.com/BusterK/wishlist/3JPEKJGX9G54I/ref=cm_wl_search_bin_1
The Evolution of Nic Cage's Hair
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBE3mby0p6M&feature=player_embedded
beautiful
Steam
Amazon Wishlist: http://www.amazon.com/BusterK/wishlist/3JPEKJGX9G54I/ref=cm_wl_search_bin_1
Is that not the perfect casting??
Gervais didn't go over to greet any of the other presenters, he did it with Carell because they clearly had to stage this little bit
Carell's doing that deadpan face he's so good at and Gervais does the really exaggerated shrug and throwing his hands up
It was clearly their little joke, and I thought it was pretty funny too
Man, I really want to drink with Tim Allen and Tom Hanks...
Dear satan I wish for this or maybe some of this....oh and I'm a medium or a large.
They were so offended they all died out of shock
See this is how I interpreted it too
totally agreed
give it all the awards