< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jun-25-12|| ||e4 resigns: I love the pun!|
|Jun-25-12|| ||FSR: Somehow I had never heard of "rickrolling." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rickro... But I agree with <Abdel Irada> that "Amos Burned" would have been apter. Rick wasn't the one who got rolled here.|
|Jun-25-12|| ||waustad: Yes, I'm from before the time that memes were typical. Then again my puns may be a bit dated for much of the readership. In the second edition of my book I removed the joke that assumed people were cognizant of one of the great films of all time, The Third Man. Over 3 years teaching out of the first edition only 2 people got it and they were sitting next to each other.|
|Jun-25-12|| ||Jim Bartle: I'm quite aware of "The Third Man." I wouldn't necessarily say I'm "cognizant" since I never figured out exactly what happened. I did learn it was not one of the first movies directed by a woman.|
|Jun-25-12|| ||Phony Benoni: <FSR> In this case, Rick rolled instead of being rolled. But I had the same thought as you, and kept wondering throughout the game why Burn seemed to be losing.|
But I'm glad you provided a link to the explanation. I had no idea. Meepmeep I understand, but not meme.
|Jun-25-12|| ||AnotherNN: "I'm quite aware of "The Third Man." I wouldn't necessarily say I'm "cognizant" since I never figured out exactly what happened. I did learn it was not one of the first movies directed by a woman."|
Huh?! The Third Man was directed by a man (Carol Reed).
|Jun-26-12|| ||FSR: <AnotherNN: [Jim Bartle] "I'm quite aware of "The Third Man." I wouldn't necessarily say I'm "cognizant" since I never figured out exactly what happened. I did learn it was not one of the first movies directed by a woman."|
Huh?! The Third Man was directed by a man (Carol Reed).>
Good point. This Carol was a man. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carol_...
|Jun-26-12|| ||Shams: <Jim Bartle>'s statement was correct: it was not one of the first movies directed by a woman.|
|Jun-26-12|| ||Honza Cervenka: After 19...Nf6 Lasker wrote <Why not first Rad8? Black ought to complete his development, before making aggresive or defensive manouvers. Moreover the Knight was well posted on d5.>|
Oh, who am I to dare to argue with great Lasker? But after 19...Rad8 white can play simply 20.Bg5 and now if black plays 20...Rd7, then after 21.Rad1 with 22.Ne3 in the air black position looks quite uncomfortable.
|Jun-26-12|| ||Honza Cervenka: Instead of 24.Bxf6 white could play also 24.Nxg7 with advantage. Of course, the Knight cannot be taken, and after 24...Nd5 25.Nxe8 Qxe8 26.Bxd8 Qxd8 27.Rd1 white wins the second Pawn having thus Rook and 2 Pawns for 2 Knights, which should be better for him, especially considering weak KS Pawns and relatively insecure King of black.|
|Jun-26-12|| ||FSR: <Shams: <Jim Bartle>'s statement was correct: it was not one of the first movies directed by a woman.>|
It occurred to me that that was one possible interpretation of his statement. Similarly, the former Leslie Lynch King was not the first woman President of the United States.
|Jun-26-12|| ||Jim Bartle: OK, everyone. My wording was sloppy. What I meant to say was I learned that Carol Reed was a man, therefore not one of the first female directors.|
|Jun-26-12|| ||HeMateMe: On the television show <Medical Center> Brady Bunch dad Robert Reed had a sex change, and became a woman. True story.|
|Jun-26-12|| ||FSR: <HeMateMe> In real life, Robert Reed was gay. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert...|
|Jun-26-12|| ||HeMateMe: <FSR> You're right, he died of AIDS, I guess before the drugs to block it were available. That made me think that perhaps he took that particular part on Medical Center, I think in the late 70s, because of his having to hide his sexuality. |
Unless you were Liberace, your Hollywood career could be damaged by being out of the closet.
I always suspected Liberace and Truman Capote, but not in a million could I have guessed that Rock Hudson was gay. Not that it matters, but these are curious little quirks of our society.
|Jun-26-12|| ||Gregor Samsa Mendel: <HeMateMe: Unless you were Liberace, your Hollywood career could be damaged by being out of the closet.>|
Liberace always denied that he was gay, and even won lawsuits against people who even implied that he was. The truth came out after his death.
|Jun-26-12|| ||King Death: < HeMateMe: ...Unless you were Liberace, your Hollywood career could be damaged by being out of the closet.|
I always suspected Liberace and Truman Capote, but not in a million could I have guessed that Rock Hudson was gay. Not that it matters, but these are curious little quirks of our society.>
Outside of the now well known underground Hollywood gay sub culture, for Hudson or somebody else like Raymond Burr to have their way of life become public would have been the kiss of death. If Burr had been outed in 1957 I don't expect we'd have had Perry Mason with him in the lead role.
In the case of J. Edgar Hoover it would have the end of his career if (as many suspected) he was gay.
|Jun-26-12|| ||HeMateMe: Yeah, even now the biopics tend to dance around the subject. In the film <Nixon> the scenes keep implying that FBI honcho Hoover and his buddy Clyde Tollson are live in gay lovers, but they never quite complete the connection. I don't think they can be sued by descendants of either man, I guess they are just being fair, in that there is no hard (no pun intended) evidence of either man being gay. Seems even more sad, because the FBI would kick out agents who were outed as being gay, as would the CIA. It was felt that an agent who was gay could be "turned" by a male counter agent. Whatever.|
In the Leonardio DeCaprio flick Leo plays Hoover, and the film very pointedly shows his dedication to his mother, how he lived with his mother long after the time boys fly the coop. There he is having lunch EVERY day with Clyde Tollson, vacationing with him in Miami, and so on. Well, It's only interesting because in his professional life J. Edgar Hoover was such a ball buster, very tough and very good at his job, in law enforcent and being tougher than the toughest outlaws. A very smart man, he pretty much invented forensic science. At least, he brought it into mainstream law enforcement.
|Jun-27-12|| ||King Death: <HMM> Here's a case where this happened to a Brit that got compromised by the KGB. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_V...|
|Jun-27-12|| ||FSR: <HeMateMe: <FSR> You're right, he died of AIDS, I guess before the drugs to block it were available.>|
The Wikipedia article - which cites no sources on this point - claims that Reed died of colon cancer and lymphoma, and that he was HIV-positive, but did not have or die of AIDS. Not that it really matters at this point.
<In the film <Nixon> the scenes keep implying that FBI honcho Hoover and his buddy Clyde Tollson are live in gay lovers, but they never quite complete the connection. I don't think they can be sued by descendants of either man,>
AFAIK, neither man <had> descendants, what with being (maybe) gay and all. But in any case, the right to sue for defamation is considered a personal right. There's no cause of action (in the U.S., anyway) for defamation of a dead person. Thank goodness. Imagine if everyone who wrote a biography saying something unflattering about a historical figure had to worry about getting sued by the person's descendants. ("My great-great-great-great-great grandpa Jefferson DID NOT boff his slave!" "My ancestor Abraham Lincoln WAS NOT a vampire hunter!" Lincoln actually has no living descendants, but you know what I mean.)
|Jun-27-12|| ||HeMateMe: I was somehow thinking that if Hoover had cousins, nieces or nephews, someone would try to bring suit for defamation. I guess that's not a direct descendant, don't know if they have any legal rights in this sort of thing.|
The oliver Stone film <Nixon> was pretty good, IMO, Hoover is in just a few scenes, letting the viewer know that J.E.H. kept a file on all presidents, included the hated Kennedy, detailing their sexual indescretions.
The DiCaprio film is somewhat weak by comparison. Hoover is more interesting when viewing the historical events that surrounded him, than in recreating his personal life, which is pretty vanilla.
|Jun-27-12|| ||FSR: <HeMateMe> Once a person dies, anyone who defames that person cannot successfully be sued for doing so. It doesn't matter if he's survived by a wife, 12 children, and 38 grandchildren. They don't have standing to sue. http://suite101.com/article/defamin...|
|Jun-27-12|| ||Shams: <FSR> In an extreme case, do you think a court might let you bring your defamation-of-ancestor complaint as an IIED action? It's a bit creative, but I can imagine all the elements being satisfied:
|Jun-27-12|| ||FSR: <Shams> Interesting idea. Conceivably. In Kolegas v. Heftel Broadcasting Corp. (1992), the Illinois Supreme Court recognized a claim for reckless infliction of emotional distress against radio shock jocks who had recklessly said outrageous things about the plaintiff's family members. http://18.104.22.168/leagle/xmlRes... (I think the family members themselves were also plaintiffs, but I don't think that's critical.) So I suppose if someone made outrageous false statements about someone's deceased family member(s), especially if the person was still grieving over the loss, that might be actionable as reckless or intentional infliction of emotional distress.|
|Jun-27-12|| ||HeMateMe: Thanks for the tips, I'm now ready for torts 101! That would explain why films like Nixon and Ray came out fairly soon after their subject person passed away. |
Ray Charles's being addicted to heroin for a time is pretty well known. Still, I suppose that or anything else in the film that was unflattering could be challenged in court.
In one scene the very young Ray Charles is trying to ride a bus and the bus driver refuses to let him (a black man) on the bus. He tells the guy that he lost his eyesight fighting on the beaches of Normandy, and "...How could you deny a Vet...?", stuff like that.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·