Eric Radford and Vanessa James to compete in pairs together for Canada

Lady Gaga is currently the only actress who actually brings people to the theatres these days due to her presence, not because her films happens to fit within a popular genre. Cate Blanchett just starred in a movie that made two dollars.
Not even sure which one you mean but Don’t Look Up did well, I thought. (Sorry for thread drift.) Didn’t House of Gucci flop?
 
Don’t Look Up is a streaming movie.
House of Gucci is the biggest grossing non-animated, non-Comic book, non-horror movie of the year. I was referring to Nightmare Alley.
 
I thought one of the points of trying to become an A-lister is so that you still can choose the best roles and get the most $$$ despite being in an occasional bomb.
In practical terms there's not really such a thing as an A-lister any more. From everything I've read, it's franchises, concepts and directors that drive audiences to movies (when cinemas are accessible) these days, not so much actors.

So with regard to someone like Heard, the most accurate term is probably 'working actor with a couple of well-paid, high-profile roles'. For someone like Blanchett it would be 'character star'.
 
I think broad name recognition and just having that reputation of being huge even if you’re past your prime and highest box office or record selling days makes one an A-Lister. It’s more about the way you’re revered or whatever even if nobody sees your movies or you stopped making movies or whatever. It’s kind of beyond counting box office or record sales receipts.
 
At this point, with how movies are viewed and financed, A-list can mean either box office draw or actual talent.

Kind of how a first year senior skater can be referred to as the greatest of all time based on talent and not titles won ;)
 
I'm not really sure what is meant by conservatives being at the forefront of rushing to cancel people, but as someone extremely to the left, it seems like more democrats/liberals are the most eager to cancel them!!!! immediately.

I don't really care who is A or B list or how one determines who fits into which category, but the bottom lime from my viewpoint is that the majority of the population cannot keep an open mind about situations (or otherwise wait for facts) and will immediately rush to judgment based on how they feel or how it benefits them. Look at the Biden sexual assault scandal that came up just prior to the election. Many people were very quick to dismiss his accuser, even before further details about her came out. Or maybe moreso than dismissing her, they tried to ignore it because they needed Biden to win the election and not Trump. Then you have other cases where there's absolutely zero known about the man being accused and there are tons of 'OMG this is the problem when you don't believe the accuser!!!!' replies when people aren't quick to rush to judgment. So it's all just situational, no matter how much one thinks they are equally applying their social justice skills.
 
I'm not really sure what is meant by conservatives being at the forefront of rushing to cancel people, but as someone extremely to the left, it seems like more democrats/liberals are the most eager to cancel them!!!! immediately.

I don't really care who is A or B list or how one determines who fits into which category, but the bottom lime from my viewpoint is that the majority of the population cannot keep an open mind about situations (or otherwise wait for facts) and will immediately rush to judgment based on how they feel or how it benefits them. Look at the Biden sexual assault scandal that came up just prior to the election. Many people were very quick to dismiss his accuser, even before further details about her came out. Or maybe moreso than dismissing her, they tried to ignore it because they needed Biden to win the election and not Trump. Then you have other cases where there's absolutely zero known about the man being accused and there are tons of 'OMG this is the problem when you don't believe the accuser!!!!' replies when people aren't quick to rush to judgment. So it's all just situational, no matter how much one thinks they are equally applying their social justice skills.
I think both sides are equally guilty of trying to cancel people. One side just calls it canceling and the other has been doing it forever but doesn’t call it canceling. Everyone has tunnel vision and will unequally apply their standards depending on what’s convenient to them. Let’s just say, I remember when the Biden accusations happened and I was…not happy with the responses either. It was kind of not a good time to be in PI if you weren’t on the wagon even if you also wanted to get rid of Trump. However, the democratic process chose Biden and there was nothing I could do about it but move on. I do wish I had my preferred candidates but it is what it is and Biden ended up winning the general election, so maybe everyone else was right about focusing on the bigger fight…which many of the extremists on both sides should learn to do but won’t and still harp on needing perfection. It’s very Yuzuru fandom where every skater is forever problematic except him.
 
I'm not saying that I have any definitive proof that this happened, but if Zimmerman and Fontana and Cipres were all trying to hide what Cipres did so C&J wouldn't be derailed from the Olympics - it would be extremely unlikely that at least one of them wouldn't have told James what they were planning. Since pairs skaters spend so much time together, it would just be stupid to leave her out of the loop and possibly blow the whole thing open.

I'm sure there are legitimate questions about how much she knew and when she knew it. But I can't believe that she never knew anything about it at the time it was happening.
 
Last edited:
I'm not saying that I have any definitive proof that this happened, but if Zimmerman and Fontana and Cipres were all trying to hide what Cipres did so C&J wouldn't be derailed from the Olympics - it would be extremely unlikely that at least one of then wouldn't have told James what they were planning. Since pairs skaters spend so much time together, it would just be stupid to leave her out of the loop and possibly blow the whole thing open.

I'm sure there are legitimate questions about how much she knew and when she knew it. But I can't believe that she never knew anything about it.
It's hard to say how much she really knew, but once it got out, her behaviour made me question her character.
 
She's been in stuff that I've seen and didn't even realize. She's not getting the leading lady parts.


I didn't actually say you were. I can see how it came off that way. I was talking more about how when conservatives don't like something it's expressing their opinions or boycotting but when liberals don't like something, it's cancel culture. And also that famous rich men rarely stay "canceled". Harvey Weinstein is the only one I can think of and he had to do some seriously bad shit to stay canceled.


Piper is prettier.

The culture that I mention though I only mean in the context of the popular culture. You can see it very clearly in Hollywood movies, Netflix productions etc.
 
A little surprised that Radford said the Beijing Olympics were one of the best experiences of his life. He didn’t look that happy on the ice. In 2018, he won Team Gold for Canada and pairs Bronze with Meagan.
Maybe he was thinking about the time outside of the 7 minutes in competition. I got the impression that skaters were all pretty happy to be there and to spend a lot of time with their friends inside the bubble.
 
"Because her partner was involved in something". That's some +5 GOE Level 4 gaslighting right there :rolleyes:
It doesn't have to do with her in the end, and she has nothing to do with why J/C are not a team anymore- which is what you were writing about. Why would I write about what he did when you are talking about her? I'm not gaslighting anything, and don't get your eyeballs stuck in the back of your head in the process of trying to push something that isn't there. France still likes her just fine. It probably would be an unusual day on FSU without +5 level 4 nonsense from you.
 
Last edited:
Just a general thought, I would have thought it'd be great to be at the Olympics in a situation like Radford and Duhamel. You win a gold on basically the first day of the Games, get a second medal a few days later, and you get to party the rest of the time. In Beijing, you don't get to really relax as your competitions are at the start and end of the Games.
 
Just a general thought, I would have thought it'd be great to be at the Olympics in a situation like Radford and Duhamel. You win a gold on basically the first day of the Games, get a second medal a few days later, and you get to party the rest of the time. In Beijing, you don't get to really relax as your competitions are at the start and end of the Games.
I get the impression Duhamel would be working every moment, down to calculating the GOE for loading up her breakfast tray.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information