He looks like a tadpole.
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 21:52 (twelve years ago) link
OH. What about Liev Schreiber?
of course
― horseshoe, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 21:52 (twelve years ago) link
liev schreiber in walking and talking is all time
― horseshoe, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 21:53 (twelve years ago) link
would threaten
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 21:53 (twelve years ago) link
Man I could do with some Thom Yorke cheesecake but I don't think I have my login on this phone.
― Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 21:53 (twelve years ago) link
― horseshoe, Tuesday, December 27, 2011
We're in mindlock.
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 21:53 (twelve years ago) link
i have a weakness for those boarding school lookin dudes
yup. dark hair + well-dressed = fuck yeah.
i don't want dudes from actual boarding schools, they're twats. i just want ralph lauren models.
― trudy campbell, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 21:54 (twelve years ago) link
He looks like the sweetest, smartest kind of bear too.
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 21:54 (twelve years ago) link
alfred if i'm ever in miami we will drink mojitos and talk about henry james and then have a hot boy movie marathon. if that's okay with you.
― horseshoe, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 21:55 (twelve years ago) link
<3 <3 <3
― ~*~ (є(٥_ ٥)э), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 21:55 (twelve years ago) link
I assume Kate already knows about this
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 21:56 (twelve years ago) link
i want the walkmen. that's what i want.
http://www.nme.com/images/09130_172506_walkmenL300109.jpg
― trudy campbell, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 21:57 (twelve years ago) link
1) can we stop with my government name, please? already?
2) WTF else would I possibly be referencing? Trust me, I knew about cheesecake *way* before you did. I think I was hosting cheesecake before it was even called cheesecake. Puh-lease.
― Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:00 (twelve years ago) link
sorry, FT! i didn't realize!
― horseshoe, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:01 (twelve years ago) link
sorry yeah I didn't know
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:02 (twelve years ago) link
We can watch them in movies too.
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:18 (twelve years ago) link
i can't believe i read all this shit!!! fuck off gabbneb!! merry christmas everybody
― slandblox goole, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:20 (twelve years ago) link
Thx guise :-)
― Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:20 (twelve years ago) link
― slandblox goole, Tuesday, December 27, 2011 3:20 PM (25 seconds ago) Bookmark Permalink
:D
― nuhnuhnuh, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:21 (twelve years ago) link
These men all have such weird jawlines, this is really what I can't quite get with. They're all so square jawed with that weird chin sticking out.
I googled the dudes and the only one whose chin I find even remotely acceptable was Tobey Maguire but then this image...
http://www.thehunkies.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/tobey-maguire-20041114-15144.jpg
...popped up and I went kinda o_0 like WTF is up with that, like they photoshopped this pretty boarding school boy head onto this MASSIVE RIPPED BODY and it looks so utterly and completely RONG because with that face I would expect him to have a cute little ThomYorkeShirtless kinda chest. But instead it's Hollywood ripped rongness.
Sorry for the body policing, it just looks strange to me. So strange.
― Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:28 (twelve years ago) link
Bah, stupid website. It is this:
― Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:29 (twelve years ago) link
i've said before that photographs are only a tiny part of the story with ruff which is why his attractiveness varies from role to role, because he is a v physical actor and it is often about how he moves. or rather how his movement often suggests a certain tactility, hes weirdly physically present in a lot of his movies. ....
― judith, Tuesday, December 27, 2011 11:19 AM (10 hours ago)
this is a sort of italianate quality he possesses, heavily gestural but extremely refined and completely unhistrionic unlike yr famous i-talian uhmerican strassberg prototypes
similarly he is capable of a sotto voce that doesn't suggest deffered/suppressed explosion or a sort of schlocky wrought 'intensity', which is quite rare in hwood
he is acutely brilliant in zodiac, i dont know who else can convey that ~saudade~, the pregant pause, the unobtainable catharsis
― nakhchivan, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:30 (twelve years ago) link
i wish there was a mark ruffalo thread to post that in
― nakhchivan, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:31 (twelve years ago) link
saudade is a great word. yes.
― trudy campbell, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:31 (twelve years ago) link
damn that is otm xp
― nuhnuhnuh, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:31 (twelve years ago) link
this is a sort of italianate quality he possesses
yeah, i think so, too, i was trying to figure out a way to say it that's not racist or at least essentialist. you put it well.
― horseshoe, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:31 (twelve years ago) link
― nakhchivan, Tuesday, December 27, 2011 5:31 PM (41 seconds ago) Bookmark Permalink
lol :(
― horseshoe, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:32 (twelve years ago) link
i bookmarked this thread so i can see "mark ruffalo is attractive" at the top and nod in agreement.
― nuhnuhnuh, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:33 (twelve years ago) link
my god Topher Grace
I actually feel like *I'm* aligned with Alfred sometimes, what with Topher and Joseph G-L.
― jaymc, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:33 (twelve years ago) link
feelin good about guys itt, except for gabbneb
― nuhnuhnuh, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:35 (twelve years ago) link
kinda can't believe Woody Allen is taking so long to cast Topher in a movie, the ideal window of opportunity is almost closed
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:35 (twelve years ago) link
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ yes :D
― Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:36 (twelve years ago) link
I am going to respond on this thread to what you posted on the other thread, FT...
he is so ~unthreatening~ (i.e. womens desire for him is inauthentic)
Sorry, but that is not even close to what I'm saying. I regard the desire as quite authentic. I am very much saying (speculating, actually) that "unthreatening" (which you determined must refer to asexual boyishness when it in fact refers to a lack of adult ambition or perhaps even intelligence) is in fact what these women want.
women should fancy the kind of dudes that *I* fantasise about *being*" (because women shouldn't fancy who they fancy, they should fancy ... *me*)
Again, you completely misunderstand. My interest is much more in discovering the basis of the attraction rather than judging it, though I am doing a bit of the latter. While I do personally find more attractive the dudes I fantasize about being, as you put it, that's sort of a synergistic concept- I suppose I fantasize about being the dudes I find attractive (though it's probably more accurate to say that I am simply entertained watching them). Either way, I am not especially like those dudes, hence, wait for it, the fantasy. If I'm saying that someone should fantasize about the people who I find attractive, I'm simply suggesting that they should agree with me as I would to anyone of any gender about any object of aesthetic appreciation, such as a great or shitty band.
Sorry if that's too much "mansplaining" for you to handle.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:46 (twelve years ago) link
such a ruiner
― fartz, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 22:52 (twelve years ago) link
I am very much saying (speculating, actually) that "unthreatening" (which you determined must refer to asexual boyishness when it in fact refers to a lack of adult ambition or perhaps even intelligence) is in fact what these women want.
lol that you think this is somehow more acceptable
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:04 (twelve years ago) link
I don't believe that I was making that suggestion (or acknowledging anyone else as an arbiter).
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:05 (twelve years ago) link
Do you regard it as unacceptable to make the same suggestion with the genders reversed? If not, why the difference?
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:06 (twelve years ago) link
ambition makes u look pretty ugly
― nakhchivan, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:08 (twelve years ago) link
looks good on blondes iirc
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:09 (twelve years ago) link
kicking and screaming gucci little ck
― nakhchivan, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:09 (twelve years ago) link
If not, why the difference?
you are asking this question
When I am king you will be first against the mattress.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QeYUdXM08Hc/Tbq0dLpvxII/AAAAAAAABbY/1Ma3h7BoEfI/s1600/MR+%252811%2529.jpg
― this is what YULE get if you xMASS with us (Fotherington Thomas), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:09 (twelve years ago) link
You aren't answering it.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:09 (twelve years ago) link
Guys, I'm kind of starting to think Ruffalo is cute.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:10 (twelve years ago) link
(Sorry for the gendered form of address)
"unthreatening" (which you determined must refer to asexual boyishness when it in fact refers to a lack of adult ambition or perhaps even intelligence)
what I was getting at is that you imply that it's LESS insulting to suggest women are attracted to "a lack of adult ambition or perhaps even intelligence" than to suggest that they are attracted to "asexual boyishness" when in fact both suggestions are patronizing and insulting by their very nature.
xp
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:11 (twelve years ago) link
because men and women are not categories that can be arbitrarily swapped out and reversed fyi - these are categories that are informed by billions of years of biology and millions of years of human culture, they are not interchangeable
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:12 (twelve years ago) link
why am I bothering
i think he has made it clear that minimizing notional offence was not a desired aim
― nakhchivan, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:13 (twelve years ago) link