Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

..and why not?

What happens Next?

There are 2 sides to every story - wait and see. Depends on what QT does
3
30%
It’s ALL OVER for that guy.
1
10%
It’ll blow over after a little time
3
30%
The Polanski project will probably not happen
1
10%
his next project will be The Florence Nightengale story or something.
1
10%
Other
1
10%
 
Total votes: 10

User avatar
bobzilla77
Posts: 15803
Joined: 23 Jun 2006, 02:56
Location: Dilute! Dilute! OK!

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby bobzilla77 » 08 Feb 2018, 00:22

That really was interesting, thanks for posting. Her position is kind of complicated, but that made me understand where she's coming from. I wasn' aware of her book.

I had never seen those pictures he took of her either...shudder!
Jimbo wrote:I guess I am over Graham Nash's politics. Hopelessly naive by the standards I've molded for myself these days.

User avatar
bobzilla77
Posts: 15803
Joined: 23 Jun 2006, 02:56
Location: Dilute! Dilute! OK!

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby bobzilla77 » 08 Feb 2018, 00:24

As regards Tarantino though, Geimer certainly doesn't cosign his version of events in which she wanted it/ was Polanski's secret underage girlfriend.

I wonder what possessed him to say that stuff!
Jimbo wrote:I guess I am over Graham Nash's politics. Hopelessly naive by the standards I've molded for myself these days.

User avatar
Geezee
Posts: 12295
Joined: 24 Jul 2003, 10:14
Location: Where joy divides into vision

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby Geezee » 08 Feb 2018, 08:42

sloopjohnc wrote:
Geezee wrote:
Copehead wrote:Read it, sounds like Uma Thurman has a drivers license but can't actually drive.
You can see why she had to be in the car for the shot rather than a stunt double from the director's point of view.
And it seems like there was a break down in understanding about what she was capable of.
A person with a driver's license should be able to drive down a single track road at 35mph without crashing into a tree, Tarantino should be more attuned to what his actors are capable of and Uma Thurman shouldn't pretend she can drive because if that is what happens on a film set she could be deadly on a public road.

In short they all sound like idiots.


The actual video is embedded in the article - have you not seen it?
It's not just whether or not she can drive a single track road - the car itself looks like it's falling apart. It looks ugly from the start.
I generally believe in his good intentions on this one - that he really didn't think anything could or would happen. But as Uma plainly makes clear - she put up with a tonne of crp in the interests of their artistic collaboration, and as soon as she called the "safe word" she wasn't listened to.
However, Tarantino's comments on Polanski are unforgiveable and as shocking as Whoopi Goldberg's. The hypocrisy around this really is incredible. I don't read the Guardian much these days, but I felt that this was a very good and well-reasoned article (and again quite incredible that even at the height of me-too Hollywood is still defending Polanski).

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/j ... ars-on-run


Interesting article with Polanski's victim.

http://quillette.com/2018/01/31/nobodys ... ha-geimer/



It is interesting - certainly offers a broader/different perspective (and it was covered quite broadly at the time when the book was published). That said, although I think Freeman's article would have been better and even more interesting had it offered the perspective from Geimer's book, I don't think it in any way changes or undermines the thrust of her argument: irrespective of whether media has sought to victimise Geimer even more through its subsequent, sensationalised coverage, and irrespective of whether the judge was being "unfair", and irrespective of whether Polanski meant to hurt her or not (I strongly disagree with the line that rapists normally want to hurt their victims - in my experience, rapes are normally purely about self-gratification) - Polanski is still a convicted rapist and a fugitive from the law, and Hollywood's repeated defence of that, or downplaying of the crime he committed, and the line that he has "served his time" (somehow), is frankly disgusting.
Smilies are ON
Flash is OFF
Url is ON

sloopjohnc
Posts: 62507
Joined: 03 Jun 2004, 20:12

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby sloopjohnc » 08 Feb 2018, 16:24

bobzilla77 wrote:As regards Tarantino though, Geimer certainly doesn't cosign his version of events in which she wanted it/ was Polanski's secret underage girlfriend.

I wonder what possessed him to say that stuff!


Agreed. But Tarantino looks creepy, talks creepy, so I'm not surprised that he thinks creepy.

User avatar
Geezee
Posts: 12295
Joined: 24 Jul 2003, 10:14
Location: Where joy divides into vision

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby Geezee » 08 Feb 2018, 17:46

And of course a lot of the people who feel that me-too has gone too far use Geimer's comments (selectively) in their support...often with the general line that in all this me-too crazyness we've forgotten to listen to the victims (somewhat ironic given Geimer's own frustration at being labelled a victim) - as if me-too wasn't started and snowballed by women and girls in their hundreds/thousands who are also victims.
Smilies are ON
Flash is OFF
Url is ON

User avatar
Dr Markus
Posts: 17670
Joined: 07 Jan 2012, 18:16

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby Dr Markus » 08 Feb 2018, 17:49

sloopjohnc wrote:
bobzilla77 wrote:As regards Tarantino though, Geimer certainly doesn't cosign his version of events in which she wanted it/ was Polanski's secret underage girlfriend.

I wonder what possessed him to say that stuff!


Agreed. But Tarantino looks creepy, talks creepy, so I'm not surprised that he thinks creepy.



Image
Drama Queenie wrote:You are a chauvinist of the quaintest kind. About as threatening as Jack Duckworth, you are a harmless relic of that cherished era when things were 'different'. Now get back to drawing a moustache on that page three model

User avatar
Copehead
BCB Cup Stalinist
Posts: 23791
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:51
Location: at sea

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby Copehead » 09 Feb 2018, 00:12

Geezee wrote:
Copehead wrote:Read it, sounds like Uma Thurman has a drivers license but can't actually drive.
You can see why she had to be in the car for the shot rather than a stunt double from the director's point of view.
And it seems like there was a break down in understanding about what she was capable of.
A person with a driver's license should be able to drive down a single track road at 35mph without crashing into a tree, Tarantino should be more attuned to what his actors are capable of and Uma Thurman shouldn't pretend she can drive because if that is what happens on a film set she could be deadly on a public road.

In short they all sound like idiots.


The actual video is embedded in the article - have you not seen it?
It's not just whether or not she can drive a single track road - the car itself looks like it's falling apart. It looks ugly from the start.
I generally believe in his good intentions on this one - that he really didn't think anything could or would happen. But as Uma plainly makes clear - she put up with a tonne of crp in the interests of their artistic collaboration, and as soon as she called the "safe word" she wasn't listened to.
However, Tarantino's comments on Polanski are unforgiveable and as shocking as Whoopi Goldberg's. The hypocrisy around this really is incredible. I don't read the Guardian much these days, but I felt that this was a very good and well-reasoned article (and again quite incredible that even at the height of me-too Hollywood is still defending Polanski).

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/j ... ars-on-run


I think he has just apologised for the Polanski stuff saying he was naive and didn't know the full story, he has also apologised to Thurman, I still think someone should be able to drive a car at 35 mph without barrelling into a tree but perhaps there was a serious mechanical failure with the car it is just odd to go around a slight bend and lose control like that.
Last edited by Copehead on 09 Feb 2018, 00:17, edited 1 time in total.
And if you tolerate this then your children will be next

Image

Bear baiting & dog fights a speciality.

User avatar
Copehead
BCB Cup Stalinist
Posts: 23791
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:51
Location: at sea

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby Copehead » 09 Feb 2018, 00:15

Geezee wrote:
sloopjohnc wrote:
Geezee wrote:
The actual video is embedded in the article - have you not seen it?
It's not just whether or not she can drive a single track road - the car itself looks like it's falling apart. It looks ugly from the start.
I generally believe in his good intentions on this one - that he really didn't think anything could or would happen. But as Uma plainly makes clear - she put up with a tonne of crp in the interests of their artistic collaboration, and as soon as she called the "safe word" she wasn't listened to.
However, Tarantino's comments on Polanski are unforgiveable and as shocking as Whoopi Goldberg's. The hypocrisy around this really is incredible. I don't read the Guardian much these days, but I felt that this was a very good and well-reasoned article (and again quite incredible that even at the height of me-too Hollywood is still defending Polanski).

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/j ... ars-on-run


Interesting article with Polanski's victim.

http://quillette.com/2018/01/31/nobodys ... ha-geimer/



It is interesting - certainly offers a broader/different perspective (and it was covered quite broadly at the time when the book was published). That said, although I think Freeman's article would have been better and even more interesting had it offered the perspective from Geimer's book, I don't think it in any way changes or undermines the thrust of her argument: irrespective of whether media has sought to victimise Geimer even more through its subsequent, sensationalised coverage, and irrespective of whether the judge was being "unfair", and irrespective of whether Polanski meant to hurt her or not (I strongly disagree with the line that rapists normally want to hurt their victims - in my experience, rapes are normally purely about self-gratification) - Polanski is still a convicted rapist and a fugitive from the law, and Hollywood's repeated defence of that, or downplaying of the crime he committed, and the line that he has "served his time" (somehow), is frankly disgusting.


He probably makes money and that is what's important. This is a town where a racist, misogynistic, anti-semitic, religious maniac like Mel Gibson is feted.

Would you bet against Weinstein making a come back after his treatment for his terrible illness ends?
And if you tolerate this then your children will be next

Image

Bear baiting & dog fights a speciality.

User avatar
bobzilla77
Posts: 15803
Joined: 23 Jun 2006, 02:56
Location: Dilute! Dilute! OK!

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby bobzilla77 » 09 Feb 2018, 01:04

Would you bet against Weinstein making a come back after his treatment for his terrible illness ends?


Actually, yes. I think he is too thoroughly poisoned to come back.

You might start to see the likes of Kevin Spacey around again though, once a few years have passed and they've done their public shame tour. Some of those people will eventually get out of the stockade.

WTF, Mel Gibson's currently making Passion Of The Christ 2!!
Jimbo wrote:I guess I am over Graham Nash's politics. Hopelessly naive by the standards I've molded for myself these days.

User avatar
Minnie the Minx
funky thigh collector
Posts: 29466
Joined: 29 Dec 2006, 16:00
Location: In the naughty North and in the sexy South

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby Minnie the Minx » 09 Feb 2018, 02:50

Copehead wrote: This is a town where a misogynistic maniac like Mel Gibson is feted.


Mel Gibson is from Whitley Bay??????
You come at the Queen, you best not miss.

Dr Markus wrote:
Someone in your line of work usually as their own man cave aka the shed we're they can potter around fixing stuff or something don't they?

User avatar
never/ever
Posts: 22298
Joined: 27 Jun 2008, 14:21
Location: Journeying through a burning brain

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby never/ever » 09 Feb 2018, 03:01

Bernie on FB wrote:
Copehead wrote: This is a town where a misogynistic maniac like Mel Gibson is feted.


Mel Gibson is from Whitley Bay??????


We wish...
Ever notice that anyone going slower than you is an idiot, but anyone going faster is a maniac?."

George Carlin

User avatar
sneelock
Posts: 11690
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby sneelock » 09 Feb 2018, 03:22

bobzilla77 wrote:WTF, Mel Gibson's currently making Passion Of The Christ 2!!


Want to know how it ends?
Jimbo wrote: I'm assuming it's bullshit.

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 52727
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby Snarfyguy » 09 Feb 2018, 04:23

Is "Electric Boogaloo" the subtitle?
Jimbo wrote:Look, all I know is pretty much what I get from Robert Parry over at Consortium News.

User avatar
Copehead
BCB Cup Stalinist
Posts: 23791
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:51
Location: at sea

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby Copehead » 09 Feb 2018, 11:18

Sneelock wrote:
bobzilla77 wrote:WTF, Mel Gibson's currently making Passion Of The Christ 2!!


Want to know how it ends?


I know what its working title is:

I know what you did last Easter

Gibson is a nasty piece of work, but his films make oodles of cash so the misogyny and anti-semitism is "forgiven". You'd think Hollywood would shun an anti-semite.
And if you tolerate this then your children will be next

Image

Bear baiting & dog fights a speciality.

User avatar
bobzilla77
Posts: 15803
Joined: 23 Jun 2006, 02:56
Location: Dilute! Dilute! OK!

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby bobzilla77 » 12 Feb 2018, 22:58

Considering the "passion" is specifically related to Jesus' sufferring on the cross, is he imagining a world where after Jesus rises from the dead, they just nail him back up there, this time using heavier gauge nails?
Jimbo wrote:I guess I am over Graham Nash's politics. Hopelessly naive by the standards I've molded for myself these days.

User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 32124
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby Goat Boy » 12 Feb 2018, 23:04

The Passion was some kind of Bobby Ewing style dream.

This time it's real! Yeah baby!
Griff wrote:The notion that Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong vocal proponent of antisemitism, would stand in front of an antisemitic mural and commend it is utterly preposterous.


Copehead wrote:we have lost touch with anything normal

User avatar
Dr Markus
Posts: 17670
Joined: 07 Jan 2012, 18:16

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby Dr Markus » 15 Feb 2018, 16:14

So is Mel officially "back" without being loved?
Drama Queenie wrote:You are a chauvinist of the quaintest kind. About as threatening as Jack Duckworth, you are a harmless relic of that cherished era when things were 'different'. Now get back to drawing a moustache on that page three model

User avatar
bobzilla77
Posts: 15803
Joined: 23 Jun 2006, 02:56
Location: Dilute! Dilute! OK!

Re: Uma Thurman’s Tarantino Bombshells

Postby bobzilla77 » 23 Feb 2018, 22:46

I guess so. He just did a Christmas family picture with Will Ferrell and Marky Mark.
Jimbo wrote:I guess I am over Graham Nash's politics. Hopelessly naive by the standards I've molded for myself these days.