Page 17 of 21
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:02 am
by DontHaveAClue
nobackspacebutton wrote:
exactly. this is a game, not some porno.
Ok, I don't want to start a philosophical discussion on Beauty here, but I want to claim my right to say that an actress is beautiful, or attractive, without being accused of being a porn-addict-sexual-perv. I happen to have in my hands, right here, a wonderful book by Umberto Eco on Beauty. As far as I know, no one ever accused Umberto Eco of being a perv. Yes, I said Gemma is attractive and I don't see why it's crude, nor why women on this board should feel like I'm attacking their gender. That doesn't mean I'm drooling on her picture nor ambition to get in her bed. I'm married with a woman I love and who's much more attractive than all these 19-year old girls, by the way. Beauty is not pornographic. It's a quality. Our society has always been a little obsessive about beauty, and yeah, women's beauty. Just go in a museum and look at some old paintings. Seeing a beautiful woman walking in the street in the morning when I go to work, makes the sun shine a little brighter but I'm not going to jump on her nor cheat on my wife. There is nothing sexual in saying someone is beautiful.I like beauty, in general, and in people, male or female, in particular. And I don't feel like I'm denigrating women when I say an actress is attractive. Of course, I don't really care how my friends look. But, pardon me, inner beauty takes a little more time to discover in people than the way they look from the outside.
And, btw, this is not a game, this a show. The beauty, cuteness, attractiveness, of the actress are a commercial move. There isn't a lot of ugly people in Hollywood, that I know of. Beauty can be just everywhere, in everything...and that makes the world a much pleasant place to live in.
Sorry for being out of topic, wordy, boring, but I had to say that, in response to the "this is not porn" comment.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:02 am
by silvermoon
OOOOoooo, "variation"! Very clever!
**runs off to google more**
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:02 am
by Absynth
GoodGollyItsHolly wrote:i just realized we were moved! to fan videos....
im hoping that this will come to better light after a couple days, but i still have a strong feeling that this is our 2nd girl.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:03 am
by DontHaveAClue
Sfonzarelli wrote:Oh, and regarding the casting call, why are you guys so certain that Bree is Girl #1 and Gemma is Girl #2?
I don't think anyone is "so certain". It's just an assumption. That would fit, no? What do you think?
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:03 am
by shifty
silvermoon wrote:OOOOoooo, "variation"! Very clever!
**runs off to google more**
Yeah, I Googled "Rock Paper Scissors variations" and checked every site on the first page... couldn't find anything :\
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:05 am
by Sfonzarelli
DontHaveAClue wrote:Sfonzarelli wrote:Oh, and regarding the casting call, why are you guys so certain that Bree is Girl #1 and Gemma is Girl #2?
I don't think anyone is "so certain". It's just an assumption. That would fit, no? What do you think?
Actually, I was totally wrong. That site with the casting call has "Girl #1" listed as a "lead role" and "Girl #2" listed as a "supporting role", so yeah...
(Unless Girl #2 is Lucy, but I find that highly doubtful)
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:05 am
by GoodGollyItsHolly
the next video will be:
Danielbeast: Bree Im OK I cant see you right now, but i am fine. I will call you when i can.
OR
Lonelygirl15: Gems Its great to hear from you! I figure you know about my problem from the videos. What should I do??
What do you guys think?
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:05 am
by DontHaveAClue
shifty wrote:silvermoon wrote:OOOOoooo, "variation"! Very clever!
**runs off to google more**
Yeah, I Googled "Rock Paper Scissors variations" and checked every site on the first page... couldn't find anything :\
Same here! Could that be another creation of our Creatozors?
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:07 am
by sunbean
That was a very nice post, Clue. I liked it muchlymuch. I agree wholeheartedly.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:07 am
by DontHaveAClue
Sfonzarelli wrote:
(Unless Girl #2 is Lucy, but I find that highly doubtful)
Yes. I don't think Lucy is girl #2. Lucy has a really minor role, and never appears directly in front of the camera.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:07 am
by Penny
sunbean wrote:By the by, I really think this roshambo variation is just made up for the video. Can you imagine playing this game Gemma describes, with huge hand motions? I mean, talk about giving it away....you can't be very sneaky throwing "man" or even "nut." Cheating would just be too difficult. FAKE!
This game isn't meant to be a game...it's something else. If you read everything in this forum you would see.
I don't remember who came up with it but think about this...
NUT kills Man (nut as in religious nut, or something to that effect)
I think Gemmas boyfriend was killed by their religion and she is trying to tell bree...She left her family and the "community" because of it.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:10 am
by DontHaveAClue
sunbean wrote:That was a very nice post, Clue. I liked it muchlymuch. I agree wholeheartedly.
Thanks! Too bad it wasn't an assignment from Ms Kelly for HSA...
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:11 am
by GoodGollyItsHolly
nice penny
i can see that
sending a message thats not so obvious to bree
in case the nuts are watching
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:14 am
by silvermoon
After googling obsessively, still no mention of squirrel, nut, man.
I've found variations including: bears, ninjas, dynomite, lizards, Mr. Spock, your mom and Mr. T.
But nary a mention of squirrels.
I quit. It's some other kind of clue, or just something made up.
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:14 am
by Luv2Luvem
I just woke up and saw that this thread was moved to the fan vid section...this does not bode well with my argument that Gemma is canon. However, they could be waiting until Gemma is mentioned by Bree to make it official so as to "not give it away."
hrph...I still think Gemma is canon.