Jump to content


Loyal Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Trudell

  1. Also, take a look at this other hiiii-larious video that Kevin made. He is such a comedic fucking genius.


    Tim has been really cool about cutting gpa kevin some slack, over and above what that guy deserves. To join this community means you support it. This forum is not open to individuals who's only purpose is to come here to insult its founders. He did not have to post a link for that video here in order to get his point across. His last communications on this thread were more than enough for me. So with a smile on my face and a green light agreement from the boys, I'm happy to report that gpa kevin is no longer welcome here.


    Thank you Mike V and justaguy for bringing this to our attention.






  2. The reason this thread is constantly off topic is because the topic sucks.


    If the topic is not worth discussion Thomas you won't hurt anyone's feelings by spending your time elsewhere in the forum. You have badgered this topic black and blue for pity's sake. Why stick around here just to constantly slam the movie and harp on other people's opinions?


    You know I think after over 200 fuckin pages, we're all talked out on the subject. I think that If we actually mash up all the talk about the actual movie from this thread, we would have about 70 out of 200+ pages lol


    When I archive this thread I will be removing a good deal of the non productive fatty tissue :P .






  3. Hi Thomas!


    Trudell, how is my statement built on a foundation of sand???


    I mean Boogie Nights was a technically a lead but it was also a big ensemble movie, and his next two were a large step down.


    Are you saying being the lead of Boogie Nights was a bad way to start a career?


    Read my original post, where I acknowledged Boogie Nights.


    Yes, he did have Boogie Nights, with a great ensemble and a great director. But I wouldn't be chanting praises too loud for The Big Hit, or The Corrupter.

    Followed by that string of hits, Planet Of the Apes, Rock Star, and The Truth About Charlie?


    Boogie Nights was a great film but Marky Mark was not alone, and he had the luxury of Paul Anderson. His acting was earnest and he was perfect for the role. Luck of the draw.


    Mark Wahlberg began with Boogie Nights at an age 10 years younger than Ray Stevenson.


    Stevenson is beginning with Warzone and he's in his mid 40s.


    What does that say?


    It says nothing whatsoever.

    Marky Mark was put on the fast track to his career because his brother saved his life by giving him one. Some girls just love a white rapping bad boy with a sculpted bod. David Geffen> Funky Bunch> Calvin Klein Ads> more fighting> fall from grace> 1993> TV movie> moniker drop> 1994> Then his film career begins.

    Ray Stevenson didn't even begin acting until he was 27. He worked his way up from acting school to theater to TV and finally to films. No fast track. His acting career began in obscurity whereas Wahlberg's began after everyone knew his face and his name. Stevenson had it double difficult. He started in the UK. He has risen from obscurity to headlining a high profile american action movie. I want to say, what does that say? But that would be smug and I don't mean to be. If it was any other movie than P2 I'd almost bet that you would be behind him. You have to respect how far he's come and how hard he's worked. I'm just learning all of this since I don't know much about him except a few episodes of Rome. That impresses me though.



    Mark went on to make GREAT films, and I seriously doubt that woulda been able to happen had he began with a crapper like Warzone.




    Maybe.. but it really proves nothing. Lots of great stars began their careers with stinkers. Humphrey Bogart did almost 30 films, a lot of them terrible, before he became a star at 42 in The Maltese Falcon. Charles Bronson toiled in TV and supporting roles for 17 years before Sergio Leone. Willis has Blind Date and Sunset. There are hundreds of examples.

    I see the point you're trying to make Thomas, starting off with a hit movie can open a lot of doors but I don't think it's ever been a requirement to having a successful career.





  4. Updated: 10-19-2008

    You can read quite clearly in the rules of conduct that we will not allow multiple member ID's for individuals.

    Recently I've begun pruning our members searching for people who do not think the rules apply to them. If I haven't made it to you yet and you would like to come forward we'll take that into consideration.


    See below for the updated list of member names and their status. We take this very seriously and we thank you for your attention and cooperation.

    As always, if you notice people abusing the forum boards in any way please report it to the forum administrators.


    James/Praetorian: Abuse of multiple memberships for an individual, and general abuse.

    Status: Banned.


    Sveinx, aka Mantooth/Matt45: General inflammatory abuse, abuse of multiple memberships for an individual after ban.

    Status: Banned, returned under false member ID, Banned again.






  5. Mark Wahlberg didn't begin his career as a leading man with a garbage movie like Warzone.





    Now you're just being stubborn Thomas.

    Yes, he did have Boogie Nights, with a great ensemble and a great director. But I wouldn't be chanting praises too loud for The Big Hit, or The Corrupter.

    Followed by that string of hits, Planet Of the Apes, Rock Star, and The Truth About Charlie? Rome was pretty great and Ray was pretty great in it. PWZ gave him an opportunity as a leading man in a fairly high profile action movie. He fell in love with the character by all accounts. How do you begrudge him for that?


    That's a rhetorical question.






    Ok, what's happening here is you guys are using Mark Wahlberg as a whipping boy in an effort to somehow defend the chances of Ray Stevenson escaping the catastrophe that is Warzone.


    - TL


    Not true at all Thomas. In my case I'm addressing a statement you made with a counter, which speaks for itself.

    Read what you said.


    "Mark Wahlberg didn't begin his career as a leading man with a garbage movie like Warzone."


    That is the comment I'm being specific to. Evidence would suggest that your statement is built on a foundation of sand.

    Of course that's all dependent on how you rate the films I mentioned. You could defend those films to help prove your point but instead you're changing the subject.


    I can't answer to what Mike's intentions were.





  6. Mark Wahlberg didn't begin his career as a leading man with a garbage movie like Warzone.





    Now you're just being stubborn Thomas.

    Yes, he did have Boogie Nights, with a great ensemble and a great director. But I wouldn't be chanting praises too loud for The Big Hit, or The Corrupter.

    Followed by that string of hits, Planet Of the Apes, Rock Star, and The Truth About Charlie? Rome was pretty great and Ray was pretty great in it. PWZ gave him an opportunity as a leading man in a fairly high profile action movie. He fell in love with the character by all accounts. How do you begrudge him for that?


    That's a rhetorical question.





  7. I think I'll expand on this just a bit. This post won't last here too long but maybe long enough for you to see it (sorry, forgot your name already).


    In the beginning, my outrage was personal. Being a huge fan of Ray Stevenson's, I was VERY unhappy to see what could be his breakthrough film dissed...and by a fellowACTOR, no less! Reprehensible, that was. But as time went on and Jane's comments finally had less and less effect on PWZ, the thing I became fascinated with was watching a person repeatedly shoot themselves in the foot and FOR NO APPARENT ADVANTAGE other than to vent. Very curious!


    Hollywood is one of those places where personal relationships really count. So it's very unusual to see something like what Jane keeps doing, at least it's unusual to see it happening publicly. I have to tell you I'm utterly fascinated by it!

    Here's a relatively talented guy (not Lord Oliver, Sean Penn or even Tom Hanks, but a relatively talented guy) with a future, supposedly, in Hollywood yet whenever he can, he snipes at other PROFESSIONALS who really had nothing to do with whatever his issue was in the first place. And I'm not saying he had no issue coz he certainly DID have one. But he's aiming his arrows at the wrong targets, damaging himself for the most part. Other than to the half a dozen guys on this board who really give a shit, a lot of the reaction "out there" is that Jane is a whiner. Does he want that? Does he even realise that? I don't think so, in either case. So consider I'm doing him a favor by bringing it to his attention.


    Anyhow, right now, I'm here for the human drama of it. But if you can tell where another actor is continually self-destructing his own reputation, and in public, I'll be happy to go there and watch THAT guy. I don't think you can think of one though, can you?


    Edited to say: After just reading your post above, Trudell, I think you can understand my initial issue. Jane was hurting somebody *I* cared about, which is what brought Jane to my attention in the first place. That doesn't really matter much, just thought it interesting.




    First let me say that Thomas definitely marches to the beat of a different drum. He's not the kind of person who internalizes much.

    Regardless. It looks very evident that you've been offended by him from the start. You saw Thomas' comment regarding Warzone as a personal affront against Ray Stevenson?

    I think it's been talked about at length that Thomas wasn't even aware of who Ray Stevenson was when he was cast so that sounds like you taking something a little too personally. That kind of assumed collateral damage is mostly people reading what they want into the statement. It hangs there to be dissected and translated into anything that suits the needs of the person who has taken offense. You admire Ray, that's wonderful, I hear he's a really great guy. If memory serves, Tom had just recently had to turn his back on something he really believed in because the studio wasn't interested in trying to do something more with the material than create more of the same thing. That's pretty frustrating. I can hardly blame him for feeling burnt at having no support in reaching for something more. I guess I understand your thoughts to a degree, but I also believe you may possibly be wrapped up in things a little too tightly. You infer that you want to like Thomas but it looks like you take every opportunity there is to hang him from the fencepost. So that doesn't really come off as an earnest statement.


    Further, you make a judgmental show of being offended at Thomas' behavior in reference to other professionals involved when he flat out explained to you that his comments were directed at studio decisions. I think you are doing a bit of creative translating where his comments are concerned. Forgive me for saying so but I think you have a chip on your shoulder every bit as much as Thomas, the difference being Thomas (as you agree) certainly did have an issue. A very real one. How exactly have you been harmed by all of this? Because for a brief moment it shined a negative light on a project, and a character you had no prior love for until Ray became involved? You yourself mention that Jane's comments mean less and less where the success of this film is concerned. Does that also include his acknowledgment of Ray earlier in these pages?


    The "Whiner" tag is something people like you are propagating when you get your feelings hurt because Thomas isn't going around singing hymns about how great this project is. The minute he speaks up and, God forbid, shares his disappointment with his fans you run quick to the nearest post-all to talk about what a baby he's being.

    Who is really the whiner? You guys have no real stake at that level, never did. It's pure unadulterated fan melodrama at work, which adds up since you mention you are here for the human drama of it. A year long human drama. Good grief. I guess you can't really have a human drama without a hero and a villain. I wonder if you hadn't picked yours a long time ago.


    I apologize for the tint of frustration in my response. You see, to me, you are hurting someone I care about. The difference is I know Thomas and he's a friend.

    I'm not attempting to suggest that your feelings are less meaningful regarding Ray, but there is a difference.


    I appreciate your thoughts and this discussion but I detect an agenda that you appear reticent to acknowledge.






    PS. Message to our members. Your comments germane to this discussion are appreciated but please make sure those comments remain constructive.

    No glib jabs please.

  8. Naw. I tried discussing that here and was told I shouldn't. I swear to you, though, I really would MUCH rather respect the man, admire him. I try, I really do! Then he makes that "no comment" comment about Lexi Alexander. That's just low, and unprofessional. But hey, he can say whatever he wants, neh? As can I.





    Well you did voice your dissatisfaction with Thomas earlier in this thread.

    You were bothered by something he said and you voiced your opinion. That worked out pretty well.

    When I read your words I felt more than a little bit betrayed that you went there to discuss it.

    It has the appearance of creating a mob mentality against someone I care about.





  9. My cat just deleted my post, Argh!

    Here it is again.




    Just curious.

    Is your purpose here as a member of the Raw forums only to act as a mole for the things Thomas says? I was just alerted to a post you made on imdb's message boards.

    It appears to me your actions would be just as reprehensible as what you presume of Thomas'. We're not blind here, and I'm no fan of a wolf in sheep's clothing.


    That's fine, take everything Thomas says personally. Fashion your own spin. Enjoy swimming in the drama you perpetuate.


    To put on a face here and then report back on safe ground to the "real fans" of this movie is kinda low darlin. And a little needy.


    I do have to give you credit for not sharing those feelings with us directly. But maybe that would have been a better idea.









  10. Well, that let's me know a few things. I want you to know Fred that I have always enjoyed your posts. I have watched everything you appeared in and I think you are a great person and I think it is a shame things have to sink to this level.


    I never forget a huge celebrity saying this on his website: "Attendance IS NOT mandatory."


    I am now going to start practicing that. I would like to thank the RAW Forum for providing me with a great time; [edited to add] I remember not the best of times when I first came here, but I did learn...LOL


    I tell ya, just to be on the same board as Thomas Jane and Tim Bradstreet has been a dream come true for me; I have learned so much about film, acting, comic books and I will never forget you.


    Take care,




    Let me understand this Tiara, are you saying goodbye to the boards because Fred has been temporarily suspended?





  11. Just wanted to add, we like Fred, we did not want to have to suspend him.

    But we made it very clear in a recent warning involving the Warzone thread in particular that personal attacks would not be tolerated.

    For the most part everyone here has conducted themselves accordingly. But there have been a couple of folks in particular who repeatedly have made this Forum their battleground.

    See the Behavior Issues thread for more info on that.


    In this particular instance Fred crossed the line. The other member in question did not.

    I have the feeling that Fred knew exactly what he was doing.

    Luckily, Tim was on it right away and the posts have been deleted.

    That's the long and the short of it.


    All we ask is that when you come here to use the forum you respect us enough to comply with our few rules concerning behavior.


    Tim informs me that we're temporarily suspending Fred, not banning him.

    It's Fred's choice whether or not he wants to come back.


    If he chooses to do so, hopefully cooler heads will prevail.





  12. I had to vote for "American History X" but I really enjoyed "The Illusionist" as well.

    Totally different films of course. History X will always be tops, especially with time doing it's thing. The film has aged like fine wine, which is the true mark of excellence.

    "Primal Fear" was an average film but for the huge blindsiding red herring of Norton's character, and one of the real reasons it worked so well is because we hadn't really seen him in anything before. He was a fresh face so we as an audience took that at face value and it worked like a charm. Pretty incredible performance.


    I am also a fan of Norton's directorial debut, "Keeping the Faith". Critics and others came down on the film for being overly long and self indulgent. I thought it was charming.





  13. In the meantime, as we wait for another needless remake, go out and rent or buy the original Angel Heart with the very charismatic Mickey Rourke of old.

    Johnny Handsome is Johnny Favorite is Jonathan Liebling, or as Harry Angel refers to himself (unknowingly) .. Johnny Golden-tonsils.

    6 degrees of Johnny. Angel Heart is a modern classic.


    This makes about as much sense as remaking Bad Lieutenant.

    Wherever Bradstreet is right now I know he's going to have kittens when he hears this one. He turned me onto this movie years ago.





  14. I didn't mind Shooter so much. But PotA and TTAC were gastronomical ;) stink bombs.

    I would love to name a few other MW vehicles which made my stomach lurch but there really isn't any point to it.

    When Mark is good, he's pretty good. In my eyes those are few and far between. I still like Don better.


    My dad convinced me to watch Band Of Brothers and I'm glad he did. Don was real good in that. I thought he was startlingly effective in Sixth Sense (albeit briefly).

    He did very well in Dreamcatcher (another small role), and I thought he was major good in Boomtown.

    Like to see more of him on the silver screen. Thomas says good things about him, maybe he'll show up in a Raw film someday.



    Wasn't aware that Damian Lewis had an acting brother.

    His younger brother Gareth is a director.





  15. Yeah, he wouldn't he'd rather get top billing in such cinematic masterpieces as Planet of the Apes, Shooter, The Truth About Charlie, We Own the Night.


    Hey, at least those films got wide theatrical releases and weren't Spike TV specials or Straight to Video crapolas.




    That's almost like saying "That's shit, but at least it's brown shit."

    The theatrical release just makes the pile bigger.


    I love Damien Lewis.





  16. Yep, bad call. Finish the film, then release it.

    I'm sure there are a myriad of rationalizations, some even well founded, that have brought this film to it's current state.

    But the big picture is the most important. You do the film and it's reception a huge disservice when you release it in such a way.

    Is it greed? Necessity?


    I call it unfortunate.





  • Create New...