Off Topic Messages

Wed Feb 08, 2006 9:02 pm

Pete Dube wrote:I gotta ask a question. ... How do you do this photo spread and not have a raging hard-on for the ages going if you're this Ford cat?


It probably helps that he's gay. (By the way, that's not just a Graceland Gardener-style assumption, Tom Ford is QUITE gay. In fact, he married his boyfriend back in 2002.)

Wed Feb 08, 2006 10:47 pm

Indeed! So this "Tom Ford" John Saxon-impersonator is perfectly harmless in that tasty sandwich he found himself in.
By design, no doubt.

Cryo and Pete, surely there's a happy medium between your views. For the record, Cryo, Pete is more middle of the road than some kind of raging right wing conservative. I took his crack rather innocently.

I don't think any entertainer is ever free of some sniping from the sidelines as in " what would Grandma think, Janet Jackson ?" :lol:
Last edited by Gregory Nolan Jr. on Wed Feb 08, 2006 11:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Wed Feb 08, 2006 11:14 pm

Thank you, Greg. If anyone is a middle path in this thread, then it's you. I appreciate your remarks.

Wed Feb 08, 2006 11:32 pm

No problem, Cryo. I know you are new here so I thought I'd mention it.

I can go further and attest (not that I was asked) that Pete is pretty much down the middle although I think it's fair to say that in Europe, the American "middle of the road" is considered quite conservative.

That's what I like about this forum. There's a surprising about of diverse opinion from the world over - all from Elvis fans no less.

I think we can all agree ( :P ?) that it's a lovely cover for Vanity Fair.

Image

Thu Feb 09, 2006 12:19 am

Cryogenic wrote:
Pete Dube wrote:Spare me the detached armchair social science routine Cryo. And the conservative values boogyman.


Spare us all the thinly-disguised, right-wing, defying-your-parents-is-morally-impure, conservative claptrap.


You keep wanting to politicize this. I guess it's easier to demonize and dismiss me as a right wing morally uptight conservative than to acknowledge the basic point I tried to make.

Cryogenic wrote:
Pete Dube wrote:I merely wondered why well-regarded young actresses felt they had to do this photo spread. I didn't question their personal morality/values, if truth be told I don't particularly care what they are. As a father it's quite natural for me to wonder what their father's would think. That's not a conservative values vs. liberal values scenario, it's a human emotional reaction pure & simple. When/if you have children of your own you'll understand where I'm coming from on an emotional level, even if you differ from me at the intellectual level.


You did a great deal more than merely speculate as to what their fathers might be thinking. Allow me to refresh your memory:

Pete Dube wrote:When I first saw the photo I thought to myself 'wonder what their fathers must think,' or how I'd think if it was my daughter in such a photo. Granted these girls are adults, and can make their own decisions, but I have to wonder what kind of relationship they have with their parents, and if there's someone around them to look after their best interests and help them make good career decisions. [emphasis mine]


You were clearly regarding their actions in a pejorative sense and assuming it implied something negative about the relationship between themselves and their parents.


I regarded their participation in the photo shoot as unusual considering their status as popular and successful young actresses. As for the relationship with their fathers/parents yes, I did wonder if they had good relationships, and if the photo is some sort of rebellion. But the key word Cryo is 'wonder.' If I gave you the impression I was passing judgement on them, that was not my intent. I'm fond of both these fine young actresses work. Hollywood can eat talent up and spit it out. One day you're a hot property and everybody wants you for their film, but have a few flops or (in the case of women) age and nobody wants to know you.
So I hope these talented young actresses do have people around them to give them good advice, and aren't just out there listening to exploiters.

cryogenic wrote:It says more about your worldview than theirs.


I can live with that.

Thu Feb 09, 2006 4:35 pm

Pete Dube wrote:So I hope these talented young actresses do have people around them to give them good advice, and aren't just out there listening to exploiters.


I doubt it, Pete, I doubt it.

They've been pretty active recently - Johansson in Matchpoint and Knightley in Pride and Prejudice. They're both also involved in multiple upcoming film projects.

Granted, this photo shoot seems rather random, but I don't think this is exploitation (it's Vanity Fair!) or a desperate attempt at drumming up publicity (though it will certainly do that).

We'll be seeing more from these two ladies in the future.

Thu Feb 09, 2006 6:27 pm

Well, we can hope so! :wink:

I"m kind of surprised they diluted each other's star power by agreeing to "double-up." You'd think they'd want the magazine cover to themselves.

Again, our benefit. :)

Thu Feb 09, 2006 6:44 pm

I don't get this "shaming the father" aspect.

Here is a quote that I always liked from Stephen King in regards to people making films out of his books.

Loosely..going from memory here "Well it is like your daughter going away to college. You know she is going to experiment and have sexual endeavors...you just don't want to find out that she has been gang banged at a frat party!!"

While what Scarlett and that other girl(sorry don't know her) are definetly showing some skin, I think this is hardly shaming their fathers. The moment they did a hollywood film, their parents should understand that they aren't exactly leading the same life as they did before.

Hell just take a look at Scarletts ass shot at the beginning of Lost In Translation where she got her first real critical acclaim in a big way??!!