Monday, February 17, 2014

The Austin Algorithm

Austin seemed to be seeing good bye to San Francisco in his latest tweet.

Adios San Francisco - AUS10

Using the Austin Algorithm and triangulating the twitter effect  you wanna bet

Austin was long gone out of SF before that picture popped


It was a picture that has kind of lived in the phone a bit and got called out of reserve


That's his Valentine weekend wasn't with someone who sent out a picture of him but someone who does like SF

Olympics for ALL Moment:

 Principle 6, a campaign inspired by the values of the Olympic charter, is a way for athletes, fans and global supporters to celebrate the Olympic principle of non-discrimination and speak out against Russia’s anti-gay laws before and during  the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi.

In Russia, you can be fined or arrested for speaking out publicly about gay, lesbian, bi or trans issues. The Principle 6 campaign uses the language of the Olympic Charter to allow athletes and fans to speak out against this discrimination during the Sochi Games without violating Russian anti-gay laws or violating the Olympic ban on political speech.

Under pressure from Athlete Ally and All Out, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has confirmed that Principle 6 includes sexual orientation, but the IOC and sponsors still refuse to speak out against the anti-LGBT Russian laws.

Where did the idea for Principle 6 come from?
Principle 6 of the Olympic Charter states that “Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement,” and the IOC has confirmed that this includes sexual orientation. But in Russia, you can now be fined or arrested for speaking publicly about gay, lesbian, bi or trans issues. The new laws have fueled a massive surge in anti-gay violence within the country. The Principle 6 campaign uses the language of the Olympic Charter to give athletes and fans a way to speak out against this violence and discrimination before and during the Sochi Olympics without breaking Russian anti-gay laws or violating the Olympic ban on political speech.


Too much said...

being a fan does not mean to discredit and invent lies because the person who we're fan isn't living the life in the way we would like

Well Said said...

Well Said!!! I've said this all along. If you don't like what this fan of "yours" is doing or the way he/she is living, then don't be a fan. It's simple.

Why on earth some here don't see this or can't understand it is beyond me. We are all human and complex and we live our lives as we see it and change happens to us all throughout life.

So it's so obvious some here have ulterior motives than just being concerned for Jake or, Austin.

What it is, is they want Jake and Austin to live their lives the way they want them to. Not as the person Jake wants and what he has cut out for himself. They don't like Jake because he does not fit their narrative. It's So Transparent. However, they can't see it.

They believe what they want, they make it the absolute truth when they don't "really Know the truth"! Then they tell each other " I know the truth " and he's lying to us. Not accepting him as he is.

So I say, Why be a fan?

It then becomes trolling and attacking a celebrity/actor, Not "Fan"!!!!

Special K said...

I'm not for people trolling OMG, because they want to create discourse here.

We all don't agree on everything. That's what a community is. But a community is also a place where people can openly discuss things.

Some with point out flaws, others will give praise, but all are interesting in Jake and Austin. It's all apart of being a community. There are ebbs and flows in being a fan of Jake and Austin. I think almost everyone will say there are points where is can be frustrating. But we're here and in it for the long haul.

Rather than complain about what others are doing, ask yourself what you are doing? What can I contribute? What to see compliments give compliments.

I have been accused of having rose colored glasses. You know what I don't mind. I want to see the good things in people. I am realistic, but I always have hope for good things.

well said said...

Fair enough!!

But I don't see this idea of people "calling" themselves a fan and having a accusatory, belittleing, attacking attitude on every move towards the one that they say they are a fan of. That's not a fan. Sure, you can dislike and speak on a dislike you have of the fan, and criticize the person, but everyday, every move?

well said said...

It then becomes trolling and attacking a celebrity/actor, Not "Fan"!!!!

^^ if this is the case, ADMIT it. Stand it your truth!!!!

Don't cover as some "Fan" seeking the "Truth", becuasue you are NOT! You have ulterior motives and it shows.

prairiegirl said...

Someone's having fun trying to make it look like they're putting up most of the outrage.

Spare me the outrage.

This coming from the poster who repeatedly calls the ladies of OMG every vulgar word in the book, denouncing their intelligence and worth in life, yet obsessively posts comments and reacts to the OMG blogposts, comments and their tweets on a routinely daily basis.

You tell me if that makes any sense?

And stop your capping, you're getting out of control, Jack.

prairiegirl said...

What does my level of adoration and asskissing mean to you? It doesn't unless you are a paid employee stemming down in the food chain of Jake Gyllenhaal's payroll.

Where have you been when I've been on OMG talking about Ray Donovan?

Where were you when I was defending Jake for doing Prince of Persia? Go back and look at Memorial Day opening weekend and you will see my review of Prince of Persia. Where were you then?

Where were you back in the early days of Reeke when I did defend Jake and Austin for hiding in the closet because that was when things were different and they had to hide that first child? I repeatedly defended them and gave them the benefit of the doubt time after time after time to others who bashed them like crazy. Where were you then?

Where were you when I talked about how I loved Jake's bare feet? (lol) Where have you been then? Because those were numerous times.

Where were you yesterday when I called Taylor a bully for what she was doing? Where were you then?

Do not give me this line. Don't you dare. I have given my support since I've been on here in 2008.

But I'm not supporting the lies of when and where he's filming.

I'm not supporting the false storyline of stealing Taylor's virginity when everyone and their mother know it's an outright lie.

I'm not supporting the lie of Austin and Chloe Bennett.

Management hates those who speak up and speak out against the lies.

Too stinkin' bad. It's not stopping.

prairiegirl said...

And stop trying to pretend you are merely a fan when you are being paid. Just stop the bullcrap.

This is not fooling me.

Those facebook comments were out in a very short period of time this past weekend. Color me surprised but I guess maybe someone on Jake's payroll tree dropped the ball and did not catch them all before it was too late.

Amazing how it's suddenly stopped, isn't it? Just like that tweet about Taylor being a power beard and Jake's name being first and foremost in the front of the choo choo train of the beard-ees.

Stopped dead in its tracks.

I can put up the Facebook names or I could put up the links in Fisher Price fashion if anyone is doubting me. I am not lying - I have every single one saved in my emails.

But I am not reposting every single one. Why not?

Because they're not complimentary and I am not doing that. No, I do not like Jake right now. But I still love the guy - there's a big difference.

And there is nothing to be gained by reposting them.

prairiegirl said...

Destiny, that does make sense on the higher price because it hasn't hit theatres yet. Sure seems like a steep price nonetheless, lol.

Pardon the harsh comments to one particular poster but I will not be accused of lying, especially in my own backyard.

prairiegirl said...

Oh, and by the way, Jake has scored a nomination for an Audie award for his reading of The Great Gatsby.

Good for him.

Well said- again said...

Wrong PG. I put up every post after Too much's post.

And I posted the name Well Said with each post.

Surely you can't be annoyed by the number of post I posted.(?)

You're mistaken If you think I've posted vulgar post about women posters here. Never have. Don't paint everyone who don't believer the OMG Jake narrative as the same person, it's not. I was posting about Jake years before you found this site. Sorry, you can't see thru the computers and I'm sure you don't have phycic abilities.

But, I've said what I have to say.

albatross said...

Don't think Jake's PR explosion of fake stories has anything to do with Enemy. His performance in Enemy is great and many critics love the film for what it is, dark and indie. It's something else we just don't know what yet and may never know but I suspect it has something to do with his sexuality or family.

Movie makes no sense said...

I know you're not lying prairiegirl because I've seen these public comments as well. Much of these reviews of Enemy have been scathing. Select reviewers are the ones trying to sell this pile of manure. Everyone knows that Rotten Tomatoes can be easily rigged and has been in the past. Ever since Warner Bros. acquired them in 2011. Moreover, Warner Bros. has a vested interest in making sure Jake gets good reviews because they were the ones who distributed Prisoners.

Luckily, I don't feel too put upon, because a friend of mine was the one who paid that $12.99, but I watched it with her and I would say this is the worst movie Jake has ever done. The symbolism makes no sense, the characters are all unlikeable, I have no idea what the point is, and even the cinematography stinks.

Well said said...

You know I'm usually not swayed by a persons view of a movie. I like to see it myself then judge. But, I must say I've wanted to pay for Enemy, but most here say it's not good. Some have said it's good but dark. Don't know if I want to spend my money. And why is the dang movie so high? 12.99 is high isn't it. Usually those movies are around 3.99/4.99, at least I thought.

make money before word of mouth spreads said...

why is the dang movie so high? 12.99 is high isn't it. Usually those movies are around 3.99/4.99, at least I thought.

That would be a question to ask, alright. Someone mentioned in the previous thread that Dallas Buyers Club is only $5.99 and that film has been repeatedly up for many acting awards this season. You have to wonder why viewers are being charged so much for Enemy.

Special K said...

The critics might like Enemy but it's not really hitting the mark with the movie goers. From what I have seen online a lot of people walked away from it confused or just thinking it was awful. Clearly the vision that Denis (and Jake) had for the movie is not connecting with the audience. Maybe it is too conceptual too arty.

In contrast you can look at Bubble Boy which was completely trashed by the critics but is well loved by movie fans.

It is movies like Darko and BBM that had both - critical acclaim and love from the audience where Jake really wants to be and should focus. Even Source Code was example of that as well.

big deal said...

Is not true SK, Donnie Darko received the same treatment as Enemy, the critics did not understand right away, and people kept wondering wtf? " i've lost two hours of my life " "what does that mean?" when it came out in theaters bombed big time, only after, through word of mouth became the classic that it has become, Bubble Boy bombed big time and was honestly a Joke

destiny said...

Donnie Darko was a cult hit that did not do well when it was first released. Fans love it, but I don't think it made any money to speak of. Same with Bubble Boy, which some movie review guides label a bomb.

I spent some time reading some of the reviews for Enemy, and while most of the ones out so far are marked as "fresh", I'm not so sure they're deserving of that designation. The reviewers talk about it as possibly having cult appeal, but I don't see any of them predicting a hit, and the reviews seem more mixed than laudatory.

I will wait for more reviews and, if I decide to take the plunge, a lower price.

big deal said...

How can a movie as Enemy be a hit? They also know that it is a complex art film, is an arthouse movie which will be released in a few theaters, but still the leading critics love it and it has been called one of the 5 best films of tff that has not happened even to Prisoners.
all critics even those who have not loved the movie gave rave reviews to the Jake's performance and Denis's talent, just you, deliberately ignoring the appreciation for his courage and talent, His growth as an actor, and artist, the finally proper recognition of His work prefer to talk about Bubbleboy

Special K said...

I'm not saying that Bubble Boy is Jake's best performance or my favorite, although I do find the movie enjoyable.

I am curious about Enemy just because of all the response to it, but it does seem that there is a bit of a misconnect with a good bit of the audience.

I do wonder if they thought marketing the movie so close to Enemy and via pay-per view would help boost their numbers a bit more than what the studio projected. Art House films don't usually stay in the theater too long.

to Special said...

you should see Enemy, if you like avant garde cinema you will probably enjoy it for what it is.

this film would never be a mainstream movie, that is not the point of it.

big deal said...

leaving aside the personal tastes, a movie can like or not like, that's not the point, but it annoys the way some of you have mystified reality, speaking as a horrible movie, destroyed by critics and no one wants to see, and it is not the truth, it is certainly not a movie for everyone, and many do not appreciate it, but in spite of everything Enemy is in the top list of direct tv along with Dallas Buyers club, a movie nominated for everything, and despite costs almost twice , with no pubblicity, and turned out that most of the critics have loved it.
I do not understand why changet facts just to make Jake look bad, for some your personal revenge

Special K said...

People are not changing the facts, I have seen a lot of people who really did not like Enemy and posted about it.

Even M, posted here on OMG that she didn't care for it either. So to say that people are making up stuff is false. And you need to check yourself.

Special K said...

Ahh no I saw what they posted and the comments they referred were neither distorted nor made up.

Yes are people who liked the movie, but there are people who really really disliked the film.

destiny said...

When I was talking about hit, I meant for an indie film, which are obviously judged on a different standard than big Hollywood films. I didn't think I had to state the obvious. There are films that recoup their costs and make a bit of money, draw the midnight crowd, etc., and then there are films that barely make any money.

I was curious, so I looked up DD, it only made $1.3 million at the box office over it's two releases.

In contrast, Dallas Buyer's Club, also an indie film with a seemingly limited appeal given it's dark subject and not entirely likeable characters has made $24 million. By the way, I thought this was a really good film with great performances.

state the obvious said...

Of course Dallas Buyers Club made ​​24 million,it has been nominated for anything

prairiegirl said...

Okay, let me write this a little more less "inflammatory".

reading the post of PG and MM I had the impression that it was never made ​​a bad movie like this, and who had the misfortune of seeing it did not survive to tell the tale, this is misinformation and misrepresentation of reality for a stupid spite towards Jake

Okay, now this claim is made in exxagerated form. M & M nor I never said that people claimed to not survive the movie.

Please refrain from misquoting of posters. Thank you.

destiny said...

Being nominated doesn't always bring in the money, I've seen films that had nominations that only made a couple of million dollars. LIke that movie a few years back in which Felicity Huffman played a transexual.

david o'russel said...

not always, but often being nominated bring in the money

public image said...

That story of Swift losing her "virginity" to Jake is unbelievably insulting. There are so many holes in this new version of events, I don't even know where to begin. But, seriously, this "re-facting" is the one that stands out the most to me:

According to an insider Swift, now 24, had been “saving herself for marriage” but was so smitten with Gyllenhaal, 33, that after three months of dating he convinced her to go all the way.

Now, how exactly did that work? I mean considering they were apart at Christmas and New Years and apparently her birthday (December 13th) where they had already done the dirty deed, hence her locking herself in the bathroom, crying all night. Seems like six weeks to me. Not three months.

This is how little respect Swift and Gyllenhaal's publicity team have for their fans. They view them as gullible, brainless vessels that they can manipulate and lie to at will. When I see people defending Jake and his veracity and integrity and then try to tell me he's all about his career and that's what we should "focus" on, I clear my throat and chuckle. Jake's people obviously don't care about his career. They are far more concerned trying to convince everyone he is a normal red-blooded het male. A love 'em and leave 'em kind of guy. So if WME doesn't care about his precious career, why should we?

fact is said...

the fact that Jake + Taylor were apart for their birthdays, Christmas and New Years then an announcement of a breakup came right after the new year then there were rumors of a reconsiliation in February.

sound familiar? his team played the swimsuit model 'relationship' same way exactly, saame timeline. why? because jake needs an excuse for why he didn't spend holidays with his 'girlfriends' that is why. jake will beard but not if it cuts into family time (birthdays and holidays)

public image said...

Some good points, but those reconciliation rumors were around January 22, 2011 and they didn't go anywhere after that. The article indicates that after three months of dating they had sex. But, they stopped "dating" in early December 2011.

In fact, according, to the break up timeline, they were officially dunzo by January 4, 2011. And, they hadn't see each other since December 9, with that helicopter "chase."

People's wording was:

Taylor Swift and Jake Gyllenhaal are starting 2011 single.

"They're over," a source tells PEOPLE about the short-lived relationship. "It ended last month."

being with his own family said...

You both are making excellent points.

sound familiar? his team played the swimsuit model 'relationship' same way exactly, saame timeline. why? because jake needs an excuse for why he didn't spend holidays with his 'girlfriends' that is why. jake will beard but not if it cuts into family time (birthdays and holidays)

And he ain't spending those holidays and birthdays with Maggie and her kids. He's spending that time with his own family.

coming soon to a bookstore near you said...

Ted Casablanca ‏@Ted_Casablanca Feb 16 #ellenpage another hero! When r the movie gay guys gonna get her guts?

Christopher Rice ‏@chrisricewriter Feb 16 @Ted_Casablanca testify!

Ted Casablanca ‏@Ted_Casablanca Feb 17 @chrisricewriter darlin' it's in the book! Just wish I had ur prodigious novel-birthing talent, this fucker's taking 4ever! ('14, promise)

destiny said...

PR counts on most people not paying attention to small details, or even big ones like dates. Only fans who follow a star closely know when something contradicts earlier stories.

General impressions matter said...

They may not remember the exact dates/details, but people get a general impression about someone pretty quickly. I know my crowd view Jake as a joke now. People who used to like him and look forward to seeing his films think he is a closeted gay man who will resort to any means to grab the "right" headline. That he cares more about being viewed as a he-man and less as an actor who truly works at his craft. Most think he was with Swift for only a few weeks. Even shorter than the contract demanded. To now hear that they supposedly dated for three months makes my friends think that Jake is just a serial liar.

prairiegirl said...

There's just no fooling the Blind Gossip crowd

Ha ha ha ha, the Ol' Tay/V-card story was on Blind Gossip today and most of the guesses are Tay for the girl and Jake as the actor. Their editorials along with the answers are funny because almost all of them comment about or ask isn't Jake gay.


Seems like people do remember details said...

Some Blind Gossip guesses

February 17, 2014 at 11:12 am Log in to Reply
Taylor Swift and 1)Joe Jonas 2) John Mayer 3) Jake Gyllenhall. #3 is laughable because women aren’t his primary interest. Thus “May or May not.” Hints “may”-er, purity ring.

February 17, 2014 at 12:52 pm Log in to Reply
I think maybe Jake G’s camp paid for the virgin article, trying to convince us once again that he’s not gay.

February 17, 2014 at 5:18 pm Log in to Reply

Definitely Taylor Swift, and Joe Jonas, John Mayer, and then Jake Gyllenhall. And I completely agree that the timing of this new leak that she lost her virginity to Jake is incredibly suspicious. It makes perfect sense that it would be leaked by his team because there’s so much talk about Taylor being the best-known beard in the business. I doubt she and Jake ever slept together at all. Plus, the purity ring screams “Jonas brother”. She was genuinely angry and upset when he dumped her in that 2 minute phone call-perfectly understandable if he was the first guy she slept with and he was that callous with her.

Gay, gay, gay said...

February 17, 2014
at 2:18 pm

Swift. The ludicrous story “leaked” today Jake Gyllenhaal was her first partner. Lol. Yeah sure. Who leaks that 4 years later except someone desperate to prove they don’t beard.
Jonas for the real v card owner, Mayer for the older man.

why did you delete this harmless message? #Justasking said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Know your trolls said...

^Special, please delete rude troll post

Florida Tom said...

coming soon to a bookstore near you said...

Ted Casablanca ‏@Ted_Casablanca Feb 16 #ellenpage another hero! When r the movie gay guys gonna get her guts?

Christopher Rice ‏@chrisricewriter Feb 16 @Ted_Casablanca testify!

Ted Casablanca ‏@Ted_Casablanca Feb 17 @chrisricewriter darlin' it's in the book! Just wish I had ur prodigious novel-birthing talent, this fucker's taking 4ever! ('14, promise)

I can't wait to get my face into this book. When ???????

prairiegirl said...

Ace has already proven to me that he's a discredited source and will bow down to pressure, a la Perez Hilton.

The point about the Blind Gossip isn't what they're saying, it's the endless comments from posters who laugh at the entire VCard story because it's ludicrous.

prairiegirl said...

It will be interesting, Tom. But will the guy ever get the darn book written is the question.