Dear Santa
I found tree.
Looks like I'm all ready to see what you're going to pull out of your hat this year.
Friday, December 20, 2013
Christmas Ready
Looks like I'm all ready to see what you're going to pull out of your hat this year.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
Santa has been spotted!
Or at least The Daily Mirror thinks he looks like a young Santa.
Is that a young Santa Clause
And while there might not be 5 of them, but it looks like there is one golden ring (on his chain).
Actually it looks more like the silver band Jake has and has worn before.
I'm just going to put this out there since everyone seems to be preoccupied with the holidays. lol. I think Jake has really destroyed any fandom he used to have. I admire you guys for sticking to your guns, but this whole A.Miller farce, the pumped up PR associated with Prisoners, Hugh Jackman's convenient "skin cancer" scare, and Jake's "hand" story, have more and more people seeing Jake for what he is. A phony. More concerned about fame and fortune, with little regard to the intelligence of the ticket buying public. Why not just live his life quietly, instead of doing all these photo ops that are so obviously fake? He just turned 33 years old. It's time to approach his career as an adult.
On a side note. Doesn't Jake look awfully pouchy in the belly in that Daily Mail PR piece? I thought he was supposed to be getting in top notch shape for Everest?
Maybe Jake still thinks he could be a Clooney, Pitt or a Cruise type star. I do not see that happening. I do not think DiNiro, Hoffman or an obviously gay Kevin Spacey had to do a whole lot of fake pr to become very long working respectable and Oscar winning stars. Jake does have a shot still at that type of career.
IHJ has some new pictures of Jake shopping with a friend. I think we've seen her before. She may be the box carrying girl. Anyway, the infamous chain is out of his shirt and there is a big old ring on it plain as day. Just like the chain Austin has.
Watching and Listening, I agree with everything you said. Don't argue with any of it. I think most of the original fandom is gone.
His blogs are practically non-existent now. Do you guys realize that Special's Oh My Godot is the only active Jake (well, and Austin but right now we're just talking Jake) blog in his fandom which has a regular, daily update.She puts up a new post for every single day.
There is no other Jake involved blog that does this. Most of the owners are over it. Now they won't say anything online or make any announcement as to such. They just are quietly and gradually fading away.
And yeah, I think it's because most are seeing through it all, particularly after all the latest events you listed in your comment.
Why his people thought it was a good idea to do all they could to try and turn off his original fandom in their desire to get rid of Brokeback, Toothy Tile and gay rumors, and thereby doing away with a paying market and strong interest, is beyond me.
Now that initial award nominations have begun to be issued and Prisoners practically shut out, I see all the Twitter and Facebook hype by his people for what it is.
Hype.
And someone kept telling me that. I kept saying "But you should see all the glow, all the applause, all the adoring and 'blown away' reverence! It must be an incredible film".
And yet once again, this person was right. Called it exactly. Because even in the couple of articles I saw where the author asked for feedback on those who were shut out, I still saw no mention of Prisoners and its stars.
Maybe one of Hugh, but that's it.
And one of the articles was in Entertainment Weekly. They covered all kinds of movies and actors who were left out. Not one mention of Prisoners.
So this hacks me off. What a crock to use social media to create a lot of spotlights and confetti where there is no real source. That is not what social media is for, to create false hype.
You know who did that long time ago? PT Barnum. That's who.
And that's what Jake's people are. They're PT Barnums.
And I'm not saying Jake wasn't good. I bet he was. With the proper material and guidance, I think Jake does quite well.
But all the falseness on Twitter and Facebook; the 'all about his Prisoners hair', the 'all about his twitch', the 'I've seen Prisoners 3 times', the 'I can't wait to see Prisoners again', the 'One of the best movies I've ever seen', all of that - it's bullcrap! It was all bullcrap.
If your movie and role were that good, you don't need that kind of spoonfeeding and megaphone chanting.
Let your acting and the movie speak for itself and the rewards and the accolades/praise will come.
Yes, you should market. But with Jake's people, it's all about the overkill. All about the excess. It's enough to give you heartburn and acid reflux.
And with Prisoners, there was so much salesmanship, it wasn't funny. And like so many of Jake's movies lately, he has to have the bromances, the "lifelong" partnerships to go along.
Now I do think Jake was all besotted with Denis, that's evident.
But this 'pals for life' story about Jake and Hugh was alllllll kinds of interesting. And a bunch of bull.
Oh, you say you haven't heard of that one? Here's the fictional hype, I mean, the story which appeared on twitter earlier this week:
Actions speak Louder than Words
I wouldn't be surprised if that LA Times article that you're referring to, PG, wasn't completely made up. Jake pretty much promoted the film, without Jackman, from mid-October on. Yet, this rogue article that documents a joint interview between these two appears out of nowhere on December 19th, long after all the promotional work was over for Prisoners.
I don't think it was a coincidence either that once people had begun to ask questions about where Jackman was, beginning sometime in November, that suddenly we get the splashy article along with the internet pics documenting Hugh and his skin cancer alibi.
Also, it's curious that Gyllenhaal and Jackman just happened to share this exchange in this "recent" LA Times "interview":
Gyllenhaal: I was working on a scene [for next year's "Nightcrawler"] and a mirror broke.
Jackman: It looks fake, that scar. It looks like you had a bad makeup artist.
Now, that quote from Jackman is most interesting for one very important reason. Not only had people been questioning Jake's hand injury story for weeks, especially after his awkward explanation on the Ellen Show, but someone had even come on OMG on December 7th, posing the very same question:
Saving anon said...
Anonymous said...
I hate to sound mean. But I have been looking at the cut on Jake's hand and it almost looks like a fake injury. Like Hollywood type makeup was placed on his hand to make look like he cut his hand. This is only my opinion.
December 7, 2013 at 4:26 PM
In other words, what are the odds that Jackman would make the same observation that this OMG poster made a few weeks back, unless PR was monitoring our site and saw an opportunity to try to downplay the allegation. With no more PR opportunities scheduled, how convenient to have an article suddenly appear out of nowhere, with Jackman playfully making fun of the idea in a dismissive manner.
Really enjoyed yesterday's post with all the numerology about 3 and 33.
The comment has been deleted now, but you all need to know that 7 minutes after M & M's comment at 21:57, a trollish reply had come on of a personally attacking nature.
Quiet all day. Nothing going on.
But the minute, several observations are being made, someone shows that Mgmt is on this blog monitoring what we're saying.
Yes. They are being paid to watch OMG.
In other words, this article tries to play up the idea that Hugh and Jake are going to be lifelong friends. You mean like Michael "Mike" Pena. Or, what about Marcus "I love to be with Jake the third week of April for three years in a row," Mumford?
The point is, Jake tries to promote himself as having all these lifelong attachments to people he works with, but somehow Austin Nichols is not one of them. In fact, where is Austin? We haven't seen him with Jake since November 2012. Wonder why that is?
But you know what, M&M? There's just something not right about this notion of a "lifelong" palmanship between Hugh and Jake. I'm not seeing it. First of all, there was awkwardness between those 2 at TIFF. There was physical domination exhibited by Hugh towards Jake with the jostling during interviews and ass grabbing in picture taking.
Then they did a 180 and began to play up the bromance, way over the top of course, complete with trailer hanging-out, a la John From Cincinnati trailer hanging out.
So you think, hey maybe that TIFF business was just because they hadn't seen each other in awhile. Perhaps they did get along. I never bought that they were good friends or anything but at least maybe they did get along.
But then came all the Q & A's, including several in NYC while Hugh was in town. And yet Hugh never showed up. Heck, he didn't even show up at that dinner schmoozing with the Board voting member.
Something just doesn't add up.
Now take a look at this gif I saw on Tumblr, particularly the very first square in the upper left corner. Look at Jake's body language during the Katie Couric interview. Look how Jake is leaning away from Hugh, even to the point of tilting against the couch arm. He is all about distancing himself physically from Hugh.
Yes, he slaps hands and laughs, but there is something to his leaning away like that. The leaning away belies everything else. That is the body postitioning of someone who wants to "get away" from who they're sitting next to.
Of someone who is uncomfortable.
Something's not adding up
I agree. Particularly, when you factor in how suddenly Hugh is everywhere, only after Jake has completed all the promo work for Prisoners.
Why is Hugh available to do all the photo ops now? AFTER the Q & A's?
Boy, it all stands out, doesn't it?
They think no one is watching. They think no one will notice.
They think our blog is dead.
They think we went away.
smh
I don't know if anyone saw this story that hit this week. Evidently, WME and IMG are merging. Now, let's see. What manly model do we know who has been seen with Jake Gyllenhaal and his mommie this past summer? A pre-merger trial run, if you will.
Quid Pro Quo
All Things Connect
You know you must be nailing something when more personally attacking comments are made.
Tells me all I need to know.
And, all the comments were ad hominem attacks. Not one point argued from any rational framework of reference.
Post a Comment