For general discussion and debate...
|
|
home blogs about forum contact search account 
“Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias”
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Open Thread
Read comments
Related StoriesMost Emailed Stories
Related Topics | |
Comments Policy
Urp
October 25, 2007 - 10:22 ET by Tim GrahamCan we tolerate a movie glamourizing NYT reporter Judith Miller going to jail? From the guy who made Geena Davis the President in Commander in Chief?
Probably not.
October 25, 2007 - 10:30 ET by balboaProbably not.
LOL Yeah Commander in Chief
October 25, 2007 - 10:36 ET by candanceLOL Yeah Commander in Chief didn't last too long did it?
card holding member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
This is insane. We still
October 25, 2007 - 11:04 ET by BDThis is insane.
We still do not have a movie showing the heroism of any of the three Medal of Honor awardees from the GWT.
We still do not have a movie showing the heroism displayed by US troops in Operation Anaconda up on Takur Ghar.
We still do not have a movie showing the heroism of US troops fighting in Fallujah.
But we get a movie about a journo who simply goes to a b-grade jail? WHAT THE HELL?????
well this is how they
October 25, 2007 - 11:09 ET by TruthMongerwell this is how they support the troops you see
Partner with Islam!
It isn't Hollywood's job to
October 25, 2007 - 11:12 ET by balboaIt isn't Hollywood's job to support the troops, is it?
No one said it is their
October 25, 2007 - 11:16 ET by dvdaughtryNo one said it is their "job".
A little gratitude should be expected for the oppertunity to live their extravagent lives.
Instead, they spit on it.
I would tell you to try to keep up, but this was intentional. Hopefully it will stop here.
Well, for once, the rich white man is in control. --Montgomery Burns
I know, but saying "This is
October 25, 2007 - 11:37 ET by balboaI know, but saying "This is how they support the troops" is a silly statement to make. How do you know that these people don't show gratitude in other ways? Do they have to show it by doing movies on those subjects mentioned? No. It's just a pointless comment about movie studios.
Bal,You earlier asked if
October 25, 2007 - 11:48 ET by Chris NormanBal,
You earlier asked if it was the studio's job to support the troops. I find that question (and it's premise) terribly disheartening and sad. We really have come undone as a country.
Agree, Chris
October 25, 2007 - 12:23 ET by RJ...but don't expect bal or anyone on the left to understand that.
US citizens have
October 25, 2007 - 12:47 ET by TruthMongerUS citizens have responsibilities yes - it is an American's obligation to support American troops, also obey the law, and a few other trifles here and there as well
And how the rest of us "know that" about each other is by the messages we display in public
So how is Ted looking publicly to you bal? Warms the heart of soldier you think? Very supportive I'm sure
Partner with Islam!
So Truth
October 25, 2007 - 14:19 ET by JimboSo Truth - you are supporting the troops AND supporting Islam by partering with them.
Interesting.
Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"
Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."
right - it's like walking
October 25, 2007 - 18:10 ET by TruthMongerright - it's like walking and chewing gum at the same time - someday you will do it too:)
Jimbo says "Truth IS a Muslim" and Blonde says "truth, take your Christian evangelism to the forums," and TM is quite amused:)
Or like talking out of both
October 25, 2007 - 19:16 ET by JimboOr like talking out of both ends of your mouth...
Or just talking out of your ass.
Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"
Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."
Partner with Islam or else!
October 25, 2007 - 14:30 ET by candanceOct 24, 2007:
truthmonger calls Jews "the Zionists" and justifies Mulism violence in Europe - "see what happens when you don't partner correctly."
http://newsbusters.org/forums/topic-discussion/weaken-within-secular-leftism-paving-way-sharia-16589
card holding member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
lying lessons from the MSM?
October 25, 2007 - 18:26 ET by TruthMongerlying lessons from the MSM? looks just like the real thing!
We have a temporary base in Saudi Arabia - we partner with those darned Muslims on the WOT - so can I tell the Sauds you call them all terrorists next time I stop in:)?
Jimbo says "Truth IS a Muslim" and Blonde says "truth, take your Christian evangelism to the forums," and TM is quite amused:)
Cart before the horse
October 25, 2007 - 13:19 ET by KC MulvilleWe don’t expect Hollywood to put out movies to support the politics of the administration. But when they refuse to tell the true stories of heroism, just because it steps on their anti-war message, and instead they put out the conspiracy-theory crap, that insults the troops and disrespects them.
We want Hollywood to stop rejecting stories based on a political agenda. Take the story of the Medal of Honor winner, Michael Murphy. Think of the conflict he had to resolve. His squad is pinned down, and unless he sacrifices his life, the squad is going to get whacked. And he knows that every sacrifice he avoids is a sacrifice he forces on others, so he does what he has to do. Here’s a guy whose story is far more heroic and dramatic as anything Hollywood puts out, and would make a terrifically entertaining movie. Any plans for a Murphy movie? But instead, we’re going through a slate of anti-war, conspiracy-theory crap.
These movies aren't drama. There is no conflict that the hero must resolve. The ending is so telegraphed that you know the message of the movie before you walk in the multiplex. But they offer this crap instead of real-life drama because the movie isn't intended to entertain or even inform; it's only there to indoctrinate.
That's what we want to stop.
double
October 25, 2007 - 13:26 ET by balboadouble
That's a great post, and I
October 25, 2007 - 13:25 ET by balboaThat's a great post, and I can completely see where you're coming from. I definitely agree with some of that.
If I were a studio exec I
October 25, 2007 - 14:15 ET by TruthMongerIf I were a studio exec I would look at the red state map and think "I'm going to make an absolute fortune, and all I have to do is NOT BE A TRAITOR:)!"
Even a caveman could do it
Partner with Islam!
If it is not their job to
October 25, 2007 - 11:38 ET by BDIf it is not their job to support the troops, is it their job to undermine the troops?
After what we have seen in the past thrity years, I can make a great case that that is what Hollywood views as their mission.
A studio's job, as I
October 25, 2007 - 11:59 ET by balboaA studio's job, as I understand it, is to make money.
Yet they greenlight
October 25, 2007 - 12:07 ET by Chris NormanYet they greenlight projects like Rendition...
Which could have become a
October 25, 2007 - 12:13 ET by balboaWhich could have become a success. Witherspoon, Gyllenhall, Streep, all big names, controversial subject. It's gotten pretty good reviews. Sounds like it was a safe bet to make.
Yeah. It'll be a regular
October 25, 2007 - 12:17 ET by Chris NormanYeah. It'll be a regular Spiderman. That wasn't the point - oh, whatever, Balboa. You can be so hopeless...
I don't think it is
October 25, 2007 - 12:49 ET by TruthMongerI don't think it is Hollywood's job to make money - because they bend over backwards to avoid the fortune they would make with patriotic and Christian films - I have money to spend at the box office but I ain't doin it - quite a few are not lately
Partner with Islam!
It's not that easy. You
October 25, 2007 - 13:14 ET by balboaIt's not that easy. You can't just say that a patriotic or Christian movie will definitely make money.
Definately? They have
October 25, 2007 - 13:20 ET by BDDefinately?
They have more solid profit margins than the PG & R rated movies.
But that is not important to the glittrati in Hollywood which kills your theory that the sole mission in Hollywood is to make money.
A studio wants to make
October 25, 2007 - 13:23 ET by balboaA studio wants to make money. Occasionally they will take a chance on a movie in order to either lure a big name star to do other pictures or for the chance to get a great number of awards, which raises the studio's profile, which attracts big stars.
"Facing the Giants" - Just over 10 million gross. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement to do more.
Bal: One thing I have
October 25, 2007 - 13:28 ET by BDBal:
One thing I have learned is that movies made during time of war that dishaearten a nation do NOT make much money. Witness the spate of recent films "Valley of Elah", "Rendition", etc that are all NOT making money at a rate that such films as "Blackhawk Down", "Saving Private Ryan", "Band of Brothers" have made.
If your premise that a studios' sole mission is to maximize profit for its investors, then every studio out there would seek to make G-rated movies since they have the highest profit rating.
But they do not. So they obviously seek to satisfy another mission.
Only 10 or so out of the
October 25, 2007 - 13:34 ET by balboaOnly 10 or so out of the top 50 highest grossing movies of all time are G-rated fare.
I have noticed that none of the anti-war movies have done well at the B.O., absolutely. I would love to see what a pro-war movie would do right now.
The Passion:)Let Mel
October 25, 2007 - 14:09 ET by TruthMongerThe Passion:)
We Were Soldiers:)
Let Mel have all the $ - fine with me - he's a good Catholic:)
Partner with Islam!
"Let Mel have all the $ -
October 25, 2007 - 14:23 ET by Jimbo"Let Mel have all the $ - fine with me - he's a good Catholic:) "
Despite his anti Semite tendencies? Your true Muslim beleifs are showing from under your burka again.
Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"
Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."
truth's so-called faith
October 25, 2007 - 14:57 ET by candanceOct 24,2007:
truthmonger says he is a devout Christian. Yet when pressed about his faith, he refuses to claim salvation through Christ or belief in the Trinity.
When several posters call him out for lying, he returns 45 minutes later with a copy-and-paste of the Apostles' Creed.
http://newsbusters.org/forums/topic-discussion/weaken-within-secular-leftism-paving-way-sharia-16589
card holding member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
Both of these guys follow
October 25, 2007 - 18:19 ET by TruthMongerBoth of these guys follow me everywhere, now - it's cool! They seem to be glued together at the foot-in-mouth:)
Jimbo says "Truth IS a Muslim" and Blonde says "truth, take your Christian evangelism to the forums," and TM is quite amused:)
Non-response #24 for
October 25, 2007 - 19:18 ET by JimboNon-response #24 for today.
Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"
Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."
Bingo, bal
October 25, 2007 - 14:30 ET by RJ"I would love to see what a pro-war movie would do right now."
Given today's anti-war mindset in Hollywood, your chances of finding out are small.
BTW, I wonder how much the choices made by the studios are influenced by the fact that many of the biggest box-office actors are leftist and anti-war....i.e. the self impressed little dears refuse to work in certain kinds of films...
Bal: You mistake the
October 25, 2007 - 14:53 ET by BDBal:
You mistake the difference between profitability with Box office draw.
G-Movies are easy to produce and you get a higher profit than others which are costly to produce.
True, but studios want to
October 25, 2007 - 18:00 ET by balboaTrue, but studios want to make HUGE money on their movies, with marketing tie-ins, not make a lot of decently profitable movies. The lure of the almighty dollar is very persuasive, which is how you wind up with duds like Hudson Hawk but smash hits like Die Hard.
Marketing Tie
October 25, 2007 - 18:22 ET by BDMarketing Tie ins?
G-movies are KEY in that criteria. Hell, every Happy Meal has some sort of G-movie marketing gig....
Harry Potter, Star Wars, DISNEY is KING of marketing tie ins.
What marketing tie in you gonna get with "Rendition" happy meal ziptie handcuffs for the S&M set?
Lol. That's a good point.
October 25, 2007 - 18:40 ET by balboaLol. That's a good point. But modestly budgeted G-rated fare usually doesn't get that kind of support. Star Wars, Potter, Disney, yes. And Hollywood makes a ton of those kinds of movies.
G vs. R
October 26, 2007 - 05:43 ET by UnsaneG-rated movies make money for another key reason:
An R-rated movie will bring in an adult audience, mostly.
A G-rated movie will bring in families - so you don't just make the money on the adults attending, but also on their children.
Warren Buffett noted this in the 1960s when he went to see a Disney movie in a theater - not so much to see the movie, but the crowds watching the movie. As a result, he poured money into Disney stock. He's not one of the richest men in America for nothing.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Surprisinlyg, Hollywood
October 26, 2007 - 10:55 ET by BDSurprisinlyg, Hollywood makes fewer of those types of movies (With the exception of Cartoons) than they do of the R rated types. THe R's make less money in the long run.
I know you'd like Hollywood
October 25, 2007 - 13:12 ET by balboaI know you'd like Hollywood to make more pro-military movies. I wouldn't mind those either. But I don't think it's their responsibility to do it. Would it be nice? Sure.
would make a ton of
October 25, 2007 - 14:03 ET by TruthMongerwould make a ton of money:)
damn i wish i had a studio:(
Partner with Islam!
One thing is clear:
October 25, 2007 - 14:48 ET by Hero SquadOne thing is clear: Anti-war movies are not generating the bucks that Hollywood likes to see:
So they are probably now sweating the upcoming releases of:
**My Daughter at the WWII Memorial
As I have stated before,
October 25, 2007 - 14:55 ET by BDAs I have stated before, the US public does NOT enjoy watching its soldiery depicted in disgraceful manners, particularly during a time of war. Quite to the contrary.
Bal: One thing I have
October 25, 2007 - 12:46 ET by BDBal:
One thing I have learned is that movies made during time of war that dishaearten a nation do NOT make much money. Witness the spate of recent films "Valley of Elah", "Rendition", etc that are all NOT making money at a rate that such films as "Blackhawk Down", "Saving Private Ryan", "Band of Brothers" have made.
If your premise that a studios' sole mission is to maximize profit for its investors, then every studio out there would seek to make G-rated movies since they have the highest profit rating.
But they do not. So they obviously seek to satisfy another mission.
At least the studio that
October 25, 2007 - 12:11 ET by bigtimerAt least the studio that put out 'Rendition' is on the losing end so far $$$ wise, so I heard this morning somewhere....
ROFLMAO!
Hollywood is still happy -
October 25, 2007 - 12:50 ET by TruthMongerHollywood is still happy - it will win an Oscar and be "vindicated"
Partner with Islam!
It's been awhile now since
October 25, 2007 - 14:54 ET by Hero SquadIt's been awhile now since Hollywood awarded a major Oscar to a movie that people actually went to see. Used to be that the winner was a project that blended artistry with public support. I guess the days of "Forrest Gump" or "Silence of the Lambs" as Oscar-worthy films has given way to movies that fit a particular agenda.
**My Daughter at the WWII Memorial
Not really. Lord of the
October 25, 2007 - 18:59 ET by balboaNot really. Lord of the Rings was obviously hugely popular. The Departed made 132 million; Million Dollar Baby 100 million; Chicago 170 million.
Actually, bal, yes it is.
October 25, 2007 - 11:55 ET by MikeBActually, bal, yes it is. Remember the movies made by Hollywood in WWII? Those movies were made to support the troops and their cause, and to keep up morale and instill pride on the home front.
The Hollyweirdos live and work in America. This country and its interests have been being attacked by Islamists for nearly 20 years now. America's armed forces are in the ME for several reasons, among which are to protect the Hollyweirdos from those barbarians who would kill the sybaritic hedonists on the left coast. So, if our soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen are willing to take risks for those walking, talking piles of feces then, yes, Hollywood should repay them for their risks, efforts, and sacrifices by supporting them.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
So now you're dictating to
October 25, 2007 - 12:08 ET by balboaSo now you're dictating to studios what they should and shouldn't do? Come on.
We are customers - they tend
October 25, 2007 - 12:51 ET by TruthMongerWe are customers - they tend to dictate what a business does yes
Partner with Islam!
Dictate? No, bal. I am
October 25, 2007 - 13:52 ET by MikeBDictate? No, bal. I am pointing out that they have a moral obligation to their country, especially during a time of war. A just war, I might point out that was started because this country was attacked.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Do all businesses have the
October 25, 2007 - 18:36 ET by balboaDo all businesses have the same moral obligation?
Moral obligations? If they
October 25, 2007 - 18:40 ET by BDMoral obligations? If they are American, yes they do.
So if Hollywood studios
October 25, 2007 - 18:45 ET by balboaSo if Hollywood studios have a moral obligation to make pro-military movies, then how should, say, Nike fulfill their obligation? Or McGraw-Hill?
Let's start with
October 25, 2007 - 18:52 ET by TruthMongerLet's start with pro-America and take it one step at a time shall we?
Jimbo says "Truth IS a Muslim" and Blonde says "truth, take your Christian evangelism to the forums," and TM is quite amused:)
Nike? How about making a
October 25, 2007 - 18:54 ET by BDNike? How about making a commemorative ACU camouflage Running shoe or a Running shoe with the USAF Logo.
McGraw Hill? How about simply making textbooks that do not focus three pages on WWII but ten pages focusing in great detail on the McCarthy Hearings.
I think those would be fine ways.
Got any others you seek guidance on?
So how many American
October 25, 2007 - 19:02 ET by balboaSo how many American businesses actually fulfill this moral obligation?
Not enough. The ones who
October 25, 2007 - 19:10 ET by BDNot enough.
The ones who usually do are led by former service members who either found the company following ETS or take over after retirement from the service.
During WWII, my Grandfathers corporation the he was CEO of manufactured light tank turrets and used to put in uplifting morale boosting advertisements in magazines and on the radio.
Not like the Advertising helped the company since the only people buying tan turrets was the federal government and they knew who made them. But it was considered the right thing to do out of moral obligation.
great idea BD! email it to
October 25, 2007 - 19:03 ET by TruthMongergreat idea BD! email it to Nike
Jimbo says "Truth IS a Muslim" and Blonde says "truth, take your Christian evangelism to the forums," and TM is quite amused:)
Well bal,
October 25, 2007 - 20:15 ET by BlondeRegarding a company's "moral obligation" to be supportive during a war:
My company (if you check my profile...a Fortune 500) fulfills our obligation by:
Making up the difference between active duty pay and an employee's regular salary while the employee is deployed.
Holding the deployed military member's position (or in most cases, giving the returning service member a better one upon returning).
Recognizing the active duty employee's contribution in many ways...at meetings, in the weekly newsletter, etc.
On a local level, supporting our troops (sending both personal and "hearts and minds" items).
Again, on a local level, supporting that service member's family with continued invitations to corporate events, parties, and things like sports tickets.
Which is why I love my job and am proud of my employer.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
That's good stuff. I wonder
October 25, 2007 - 20:54 ET by balboaThat's good stuff. I wonder if any studios do similar things.
I have no idea, bal
October 25, 2007 - 20:58 ET by BlondeIt's just what we do.
Which, as I said, makes me proud to work where I do.
And you just got yourself off of my "do not reply list"....I wish you'd not be so snarky and just be yourself. You're much more fun when you're just being you than trying to be snarky to get a reaction.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Smart businesses don't
October 25, 2007 - 18:44 ET by Indiana JoeSmart businesses don't alienate a large part of their customer base. Maybe it's a moral obligation to their stockholders?
Is it a money thing? Or a freedom thing? Or an agenda thing? Or a patriotism thing?
Perhaps. I don't know if
October 25, 2007 - 18:48 ET by balboaPerhaps. I don't know if it's "moral" as much as a "business" obligation. And again, it's not a done deal that such a movie will make money.
The military is the sole
October 25, 2007 - 18:54 ET by TruthMongerThe military is the sole outfit that preserves their ability to make a ton of money, at least giving the US mil a fair shake in the movies would be nice
But they don't have to - it's not required by law
Jimbo says "Truth IS a Muslim" and Blonde says "truth, take your Christian evangelism to the forums," and TM is quite amused:)
My point, bal, was that you
October 25, 2007 - 19:15 ET by Indiana JoeMy point, bal, was that you started out making it a "business" decision. When the point was made that it could be a GOOD business decision, you seemed to switch to it being a question of "freedom."
No movie is guaranteed to make money. But Hollywood has done more than enough pandering to the "anti-war" side. AND not made money on EVERY one of those movies. Why not try the other side? Every modern pro-military movie I can think of (few that they are!) has been at least reasonably successful.
Seems no more risky than any other "business" decision.
just btw: in re "worse" vs. "worst," my point was that there is always something "worse." Followed to it's logical conclusion, the only thing not trumped by that reasoning is the "WORST."
It is a business decision,
October 25, 2007 - 19:22 ET by balboaIt is a business decision, and they should feel free to make the business decisions they think are appropriate.
Sure, Hollywood could change their tone, but then this war has been rather controversial, so it's more than natural for the movies to reflect that.
Some pro-military movies are successful (Saving Private Ryan), and some aren't (The Great Raid).
Only representing one side
October 25, 2007 - 19:55 ET by Indiana JoeOnly representing one side hardly reflects any controversy. It's called "monolithic thinking." Or maybe "lock-step."
And some movies are good (Saving Private Ryan), and some aren't (The Great Raid). ;^)
More on movies
October 26, 2007 - 05:50 ET by UnsaneAh, but if a good pro-military movie is made, there's several million dollars to be made.
From: veterans, active duty military, Reservists, Guardsmen, families of all of them, virtually the entire population of Military City USA (otherwise known as San Antonio)...
The Air Force Times (no, don't subscribe) once had a top 50 list of military themed flicks. #1: Full Metal Jacket (I suspect because everyone in the military can at least relate to the first half in some way). #2: Saving Private Ryan (not enough people see the first 20 or so minutes, IMHO).
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
The Great Raid was not
October 26, 2007 - 10:58 ET by BDThe Great Raid was not supported by the company releasing it.
In fact, it never made it to most military towns such as Sierra Vista AZ. I waited for it to come so I could view it. It never arrived.
Not a bad flick.
I thought The Great Raid
October 26, 2007 - 11:06 ET by balboaI thought The Great Raid was pretty good.
As for support from the company that made it, I don't really know/remember what they did or didn't do. But if people had turned out for it in big numbers, it would have made it to more towns.
The purpose of fiction
October 25, 2007 - 11:32 ET by KC MulvilleThe reason you fictionalize this is so that if reality disproves what you hope to say, you can disregard reality. "Based on a true story" means that you felt free to change things if you felt like it. It's just CYA license.
Gee, I'm sure that movie
October 25, 2007 - 11:46 ET by Chris NormanGee, I'm sure that movie will just clean up. It sounds like a summer movie blockbuster along the lines of Spiderman. Where do they get the financing for these sure bets? Are they giving more money away?
World Series
October 25, 2007 - 10:23 ET by BigFellaBosox 13 Rockies 1. That is one big can of wup the Sox opened last night...
His Zippity was okay but his Do Dah was awful. -- Space Ghost
Can't stand BOS (or the AL
October 25, 2007 - 10:24 ET by dvdaughtryCan't stand BOS (or the AL really).
COL is in way over their head.
Well, for once, the rich white man is in control. --Montgomery Burns
Why?
October 25, 2007 - 10:31 ET by RJWhy?
I should probably clarify.
October 25, 2007 - 11:10 ET by dvdaughtryI should probably clarify. I don't like BOS fans, thus don't like the team.
BOS fans are like Cub fans. When things are great they are flyin' high! The world could not be a better place.
Then they are just good enough, (but not a real contender) all of the BS comes about how good they are. Then, when the inevitable happens there is someone (everyone) to blame.
When they are bad, you would think the world is coming to an end.
Don't like the AL because they don't make the pitcher hit. It will never go away because of players like David Ortiz, but it takes an element away from the game.
All that said, I have never been to Fenway and hope I can before it goes under. They tell me there is no place like Boston to watch a game.
Well, for once, the rich white man is in control. --Montgomery Burns
Agree with you about the designated hitter, but
October 25, 2007 - 11:24 ET by RJthe rest of it sounds like sour grapes. In fact, there was an article in today's paper about how well the Rox say they've been treated by Boston fans.
I agree that Boston fans are emotional about their team, but that's part of the fun. Speaking of fun, the Sox also seem to embrace baseball's traditional and historical concept of "characters" on the team far more than other teams do. Did you get to watch/listen to the dugout percussion band last night? Damon had to cut his hair and beard in order to play for the Yankees. Manny was kicked out of Cleveland because he was too much of a free spirit. Etc, etc.
(BTW, Del, dervish and I were discussing this aspect over on yesterday's Open Thread. There's some good instances there.)
Possibly related is the fact that the Red Sox have sold out every seat for every game since 2003.
And Fenway go under? Wash your potty mouth out with soap! :^)
Won't deny sour grapes.
October 25, 2007 - 11:36 ET by dvdaughtryWon't deny sour grapes. That has been my experience with Bosox fans (Dodger fans are in this group too).
I didn't mean to give a hostile connotation, but the emotion wears on me.
Well, for once, the rich white man is in control. --Montgomery Burns
You need to lighten up, dv
October 25, 2007 - 11:58 ET by RJBaseball is supposed to be fun, and remember, "there's no crying in baseball." :^)
Don't Worry
October 25, 2007 - 11:40 ET by Del DolemonteFenway's not going anywhere, at least for the forseeable future. The "new" owners (they actually took over several years ago) have invested too much money in improvements to the place to walk away from it. In addition, the red tape involved in getting anything built in that bluest of states speaks for itself.
Speaking of Fenway, I forgot to mention a few of my favorite Fenway memories on yesterday's Open Thread:
1. September 1975 pennant drive, I'm in the bleachers to see Luis Tiant pitch a 1-0 shutout against Baltimore's Jim Palmer. Earl Weaver went thru 3 packs of cigarettes in the dugout.
2. Early 1980s: a trombone convention was in town for the weekend. A bunch of them brought their 'bones to the game. It was a riot.
3. Also early 1980s: Got to see one of the first wins for a wild man named Oil Can Boyd.
4. Early 2000s: Luis Tiant, who was coaching baseball at a Boston-area college, brings his entire team to the game, and they sit in the 3rd base grandstand. All thru the game, fans stop by to talk story with El Tiante. He was gracious and happy the entire time. What a great guy.
Tiant now runs a Cuban sandwich stand in the food court behind Fenway's home plate, by the way.
thanks for the memories, Del
October 25, 2007 - 11:48 ET by RJI know Fenway's not going anywhere, just playing with dvdaughtry, who's all tensed up about Sox fans having too much fun....and, my goodness, we even had fun in the midst of the looong World Series drought. :^)
just playing with
October 25, 2007 - 11:58 ET by dvdaughtryjust playing with dvdaughtry, who's all tensed up about Sox fans having too much fun....and, my goodness, we even had fun in the midst of the looong World Series drought.
BAH!
Well, for once, the rich white man is in control. --Montgomery Burns
dv....
October 25, 2007 - 12:01 ET by RJ;^)
Oh, And Another One
October 25, 2007 - 16:26 ET by Del DolemonteIn 1988, the Red Sox started a brief run of Old-Timers' Games. The first one was probably the best. Besides getting to see Yaz and El Tiante play one more time, I also got to see Bob Feller pitch-wearing his old Tribe uniform no less! Yes, the Heater from Van Meter still had it.
I actually was at game 4 in
October 25, 2007 - 16:44 ET by dvdaughtryI actually was at game 4 in 2004.
It was over as soon as Damon lead the game off with a dinger.
Well, for once, the rich white man is in control. --Montgomery Burns
AL vs. NL
October 25, 2007 - 11:25 ET by NoMoreClintons"Don't like the AL because they don't make the pitcher hit . . . it takes an element away from the game."
Yeah, it takes away an automatic out. The AL game is more exciting than the stodgy NL. Last night was proof. You NL fans look down your noses at the AL. I know, I lived in St. Louis for 12 years. They call it "that other league" or "the junior circuit". It's now the superior league.
Go Red Sox!