Friday, July 10, 2009
|
|
Bunch: Bruno, Beat It
|
|
Posted by:
Jillian Bandes at
1:09 PM
|
Great review of Bruno by the Washington Times' Sonny Bunch.
One of the highlights of "Bruno" is an encounter between the title character and a series of abusive stage parents who have brought in their infants to interview for a shot at an on-camera appearance. As the demands escalate into ever-more-ridiculous territory - he asks the parents if they would mind having their infants lose 10 lbs. and get liposuction or appear on a crucifix - it's hard not to laugh while simultaneously forcing back tears for the poor children who have those monstrous parents. In the end, "Bruno" simply isn't as funny as "Borat"; the belly laughs just aren't there, and the escapades seem more contrived than before.
|
|
|
works for the Rev. Moon. I think nothing could top that for funny. But I'm not too worried for Bruno...all the theaters in my area are sold out already for tonight. |
|
|
who works for the Rev. Moon. |
|
|
|
|
It was the genetic fallacy both times. |
|
|
for Pure Garbage. Too long by 89 minutes. |
|
|
you wouldn't likely 'get' it anyway. |
|
Didn't get the chance to comment to you how much I enjoyed your reminiscence of your day in 1963.
A few weeks ago, I was back on Davis Monthan after many years absence. Your post was like that 're-entry' to DM base for me.
Davis Monthan doesn't have all the white wood structures that were the base buildings in the hot Arizona sun for so many years. Those have been replaced with modern cinder block and stucco, painted an appropriate desert friendly hue.
If you closed your eyes for a second however, and looked at the one remaining wood structure on the base, a spired chapel that has been left as reminder of all the service personel that passed that way in the 40's and thereon, you could see the old base, remember the three service clubs and smell the grill at the Airman's pool.
Back to overseas ... that 4th of July, in 1963 for me as a child and you as active was one we apparently carry like an ID Card that doesn't ever expire. |
|
|
Most flick reviews, NYTimes, has this show as a stab in the heart of all the supposed homosexual adverse bigots. Hmmm. Well, of course, the flick is outrageous and it does show the radical extreme of homosexuality. Should this mean that no one should have a view that this self-absorbed view of the supposed gay life-style is not only absurd, but immoral? What makes Bruno, or any liberal film buff, reviewer, MSM writer, think that anti-homosexual views are not legit if one sees the adverse affect of gay porn, the anti-Biblical life styles that homosexuals live and the portrayal of homosexual life as normal because supposedly 'God made them that way'?? The drive to stop any thinking criticism about homosexuals whether morally, politically, intellectually , or culturally is so PC and bigoted itself, that why should people be made to fear that their views are out of bounds?! If anyone in business, sports, housing doesn't deal with gays out of bigotry, how can one decide that? Bigotry is not very civil but what if the opinions based on certain facts produces a knowledge that homosexuality is not only morally wrong but culturally silly too? Odd that such a supposed small group of people should bring so much fear to the table of opinions in this nation! |
|
|
don't see the movie. Do you think that the movie should be banned? |
|
Is it just me or have other's noticed how liberal media exploits homosexuals? What's more gay actors are never cast to play gay roles. It's always a straight guy who does an over the top imitation of a gay man...
Models and actors should never be childrern is what I'm reading here. So who producing the kids for commercials and clothing ads?
So not only does Hollywood exploit homosexuals the entertainment industy dipicts parents as monsters and we are supposed to buy a ticket to watch that.
Hollywood also calls older women cougars while the old farts married to younger women are called lucky. |
|
How about you let gay organizations worry about 'exploitation'. Bruno will be a huge success and will play to gays and straights alike. As I said, my local theatre is already sold out. Tom Hanks was 'over the top' in Philadelphia? Really. And one of the reasons gays have not historically played 'gay roles' is because when you out yourself, you never play a straight role again.
Which movie depicted 'parents as monsters'? Who is making you go to the movies? Hollywood didn't create the word 'cougar', and ageism is not new. Most of the 'cougars' are found in middle class communities oogling their sons' teenage male friends. |
|
|
Of course not. Gays have enough problems and inane defenders like you to want to do something the First Amendment protects. Even for dopes like you. |
|
|
|